Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #11385
| From | "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth, comp.lang.lisp |
| Subject | Re: forth vs common lisp |
| Date | 2012-04-19 04:08 +0200 |
| Organization | Informatimago |
| Message-ID | <87d374jwx0.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> (permalink) |
| References | <96e0a52b-0997-43f8-b6a0-dda000b133ab@v1g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <9553250e-bb76-4b25-b42f-48b6041a5c05@f17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> <slrnjou5rb.2pu.zbigniew2011REMOVE@Tichy.myhome.org> <bcdab23f-e7c3-4a83-8b77-7eacfa1cbd21@s7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> writes:
> On Apr 18, 12:34 pm, Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REM...@gmail.REMOVE.com>
> wrote:
>> In comp.lang.forth, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>>
>> > I think that Lisp is a better language for desktop-computer
>> > programming than Forth,
>>
>> ...because?
>
> I think that Forth could be used for large programs on the desktop,
> but only if somebody were willing to invest the time and effort into
> writing a lot of libraries of support code (this implies a big budget
> and a relaxed schedule) --- what has been available for decades in the
> Lisp community. Both Forth and Lisp are extensible, so these are the
> only two languages that I would consider for a large project.
There was a Forth implementation on MacOS that allowed to write Mac
applications.
There were and are GUI libraries, eg. the Mac OS Toolbox, the Mac OS X
Cocoa framework, Gtk, Qt, etc. The only thing you need from a language,
is some programmer-friendly FFI to be able to call those libraries
easily, and you're all set to write big applications.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
forth vs common lisp quiet_lad <gavcomedy@gmail.com> - 2012-04-14 17:05 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-14 17:10 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-15 08:49 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-15 10:02 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Fanzo <cristianof6@gmail.com> - 2012-04-15 17:47 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-15 11:20 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-15 22:22 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-15 13:29 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp quiet_lad <gavcomedy@gmail.com> - 2012-04-24 09:33 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp lynx <rinkasu@kaze.void.null> - 2012-04-15 23:44 +0000
Re: forth vs common lisp jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-15 17:41 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-18 09:49 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-18 19:34 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-18 18:50 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2012-04-19 04:08 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 06:25 +0300
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 19:55 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 21:39 +0300
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 20:47 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 22:37 +0300
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 21:59 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2012-04-19 09:28 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-19 01:03 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp kodifik <kodifik@eurogaran.com> - 2012-04-19 02:05 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-19 04:29 -0500
Re: forth vs common lisp Tamas Papp <tkpapp@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 10:15 +0000
Re: forth vs common lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-04-19 08:45 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-19 14:15 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Rugxulo <rugxulo@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 16:06 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2012-04-20 05:24 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp lynx <rinkasu@kaze.void.null> - 2012-04-20 04:17 +0000
Re: forth vs common lisp Don Geddis <don@geddis.org> - 2012-04-20 08:34 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp lynx <rinkasu@kaze.void.null> - 2012-04-20 16:54 +0000
Re: forth vs common lisp Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-04-20 17:03 +0000
Re: forth vs common lisp Don Geddis <don@geddis.org> - 2012-04-20 16:57 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Tim Bradshaw <tfb@tfeb.org> - 2012-04-21 13:06 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Rugxulo <rugxulo@gmail.com> - 2012-04-20 13:20 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2012-04-20 23:14 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-21 11:04 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Tim Bradshaw <tfb@tfeb.org> - 2012-04-21 22:12 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-21 15:19 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Tim Bradshaw <tfb@tfeb.org> - 2012-04-22 01:01 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-21 18:35 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Tim Bradshaw <tfb@tfeb.org> - 2012-04-22 03:13 +0100
Re: FreeDOS CL "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2012-04-22 10:58 +0200
Re: FreeDOS CL "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2012-04-22 11:01 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-22 06:18 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-04-22 03:43 +0000
Re: forth vs common lisp Tim Bradshaw <tfb@tfeb.org> - 2012-04-21 13:02 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-04-21 16:29 +0000
Re: forth vs common lisp jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-21 14:38 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 11:17 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Rugxulo <rugxulo@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 15:39 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-04-18 22:17 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 10:11 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-04-19 01:28 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 10:37 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Ecki <ecki@intershop.de> - 2012-04-19 12:12 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-19 09:35 -1000
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 21:56 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-19 11:25 -1000
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-20 00:00 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 09:49 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 19:15 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 12:01 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-19 21:12 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 15:25 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-20 00:59 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-04-19 18:49 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-04-20 07:14 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-20 20:57 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-20 21:21 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-04-22 12:21 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-22 12:27 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-04-22 14:59 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-22 15:25 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-22 15:38 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-22 06:23 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-04-21 13:30 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-21 18:12 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-04-20 11:55 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-20 12:14 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-04-20 16:56 +0200
Re: forth vs common lisp Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-04-20 19:52 +0100
Re: forth vs common lisp Rugxulo <rugxulo@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 15:10 -0700
Re: forth vs common lisp quiet_lad <gavcomedy@gmail.com> - 2012-04-24 09:58 -0700
csiph-web