Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #14548

Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc?

Show all headers | View raw

On Jul 29, 9:30 pm, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@notemailnot.cmm>
wrote:
> <visplovesl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:3de6f3cd-3487-4689-8168-60a6865b2c17@googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > [many posts by Gavino]
>
> You seem to TOGGLE (closest thing to Forth in this thread...) between making
> trivial attempts at Forth for which I can't help you and blasting the group
> with unwanted messages.  I was rather supportive of you recently despite
> many others saying you were just pretending to learn Forth.  It seems I was
> wrong.  You're still annoying people instead of learning Forth.
>
> I truly appreciate the verbal barrage of all the thoughts in your brain,
> your complete inability to control your impulses to express those thoughts,
> the total non-Forth nature of all of them, your apparent attention seeking
> nature, and the reiteration of _exactly_ same thoughts every six months or
> so under a new and different alias presumably every time the guys in white
> lab coats shave your head for electro-shock.  Sorry, that's a total lie.
>
> BTW, although your psychologist told you to keep a journal of your thoughts
> via free-association, that doesn't mean posting every one of those thoughts
> to c.l.f.
>
> Do you have some sort of prefrontal cortex damage?  Lobotomy?  Is that
> hampering your IQ in any way?
>
> > love to see a forth pc beat linux n bsd
>
> I think I've responded to your basic statement of Forth being capable of
> "beating" something a few times now, but let me try again.  Forth is not
> capable of "beating" anything.  If it was, it would've "beaten" something
> many years ago.
>
> IMO - I'll repeat that for those here that seem to ignore clarifiers:
>
> IMO, it's unlikely a Forth PC will ever outperform Linux or BSD.  Neither
> the Forth language nor Forth hardware have proven they are sufficiently
> capable.  Forth processors utterly failed in the marketplace some years ago.
> Even if they had had some advantage over non-Forth processors which I don't
> believe they ever did, they weren't sufficiently advanced, low power, or low
> cost enough to earn any significant marketshare.  Interpreted languages,
> including interpreted Forths, will always be slower than optimized, compiled
> code.  Interpreters re-implement a microprocessor in software.  So, you have
> a hardware microprocessor executing code which emulates a processor in
> software, i.e., slow.  OTOH, compiled Forths do have a chance to compete
> with languages like C, but I don't think sufficient resources have been
> invested in optimizing Forth.  Even so, I also (still) don't believe the
> Forth language has sufficient language features to allow it to be
> competitive with C even if Forth is compiled and optimized.  In many
> regards, Forth is even more low-level than C.  That's when you read me
> saying: "Why didn't or doesn't Forth do this or this?" or "Why does Forth do
> it that way?".  Forth also has some words (stack shifts) and features (dual
> stacks) that just don't fit well with standard microprocessors.  Once you
> strip away the defects in Forth and build up the missing functionality, you
> get C.  It's also very late for Forth to gain much market share, i.e., lack
> of programmers, not being taught in schools, not being used by industry, C
> and C derived language dominance, etc.
>
> Rod Pemberton

I think he has Attention Deficit Disorder, coupled with an attention-
seeking element to his personality. Not worth bothering with. If we
all just ignore him he might go away.

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? visploveslisp@gmail.com - 2012-07-28 21:53 -0700
  Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-29 08:38 -0700
    Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? visploveslisp@gmail.com - 2012-07-31 11:06 -0700
      Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-31 11:43 -0700
        Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? visploveslisp@gmail.com - 2012-07-31 12:16 -0700
  Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-07-29 16:30 -0400
    Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-30 00:50 -0700
  Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-07-29 23:06 -0700
    Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-30 00:49 -0700
      Re: g144 pc anytime soon? better than arm based pc? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-07-30 13:21 -0700

csiph-web