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


Groups > comp.lang.forth > #34336

Re: Does Forth solve the paradox?

Path csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!news.informatik.hu-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk>
Newsgroups comp.lang.forth
Subject Re: Does Forth solve the paradox?
Date Thu, 06 Nov 2014 19:54:40 +0000
Organization Hidecs Consultancy
Lines 46
Message-ID <cc2201FgmcbU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <6f36e5e5-037c-41e2-89c5-2bc11937ddcd@googlegroups.com> <545a7e77$0$15893$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> <2014Nov6.102256@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7Bit
X-Trace individual.net jAmLiD34f0Wih8Jh4993BAcHMYKciqeNAcdD4BriFfRgQGM/of
Cancel-Lock sha1:o5wyRMhKf2YUw4ksOnpKROtJn+w=
User-Agent KNode/4.11.4
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.forth:34336

Show key headers only | View raw


Anton Ertl wrote:

[%X]

> Sure, there are also cases where a simple solution is more flexible
> than, say, a solution that is tightly optimized for a specific
> application szenario; but in this example there is a third issue at
> work that apparently took precedence over simplicity and flexibility.
> Nobody will choose a complex and inflexible solution if they see a
> simple and flexible one, unless the complex and inflexible solution
> gives another, more important benefit.

Taking a complex problem space and decomposition of that complex problem 
space into smaller, less complex problems (and continuing in that vein until 
you have a collection of simple problems to solve) is a divide and conquer 
regime that has worked in many other engineering and craft disciplines to 
great success. What you end up with, having solved all those simple small 
problems, is a collection of solution components that you just have to 
assemble together as a collective. I have referred to such a strategy as a 
"Component Oriented" method and it has a great many benefits, including 
flexibility.

Take a construction solution like Mecanno or Lego. These are extremely 
simple components, yet they have been assembled into some of the most 
interestingly complex constructions, yet retain the flexibilit of the 
individual component.

Forth is very well placed to be the Mecanno or Lego of the Software World if 
you think about it in Component Oriented terms. Each individual word can 
also be fully certified to conform to its specification (if you had written 
your requirements for the word first in the style of its glossary entry). 

As to the original question. All I ask is "What Paradox?" Naturally, you 
have to decompose and resolve the natural architecture of the problem space 
into the solution space without making the smaller components too difficult 
to fully understand. It takes some effort to get the simplest and most 
elegant solutions but that effort is worth it.

-- 
********************************************************************
Paul E. Bennett IEng MIET.....<email://Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk>
Forth based HIDECS Consultancy.............<http://www.hidecs.co.uk>
Mob: +44 (0)7811-639972
Tel: +44 (0)1235-510979
Going Forth Safely ..... EBA. www.electric-boat-association.org.uk..
********************************************************************

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


Thread

Does Forth solve the paradox? forthisit@gmail.com - 2014-11-05 08:08 -0800
  Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-11-05 19:45 +0000
    Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-11-05 10:43 -1000
      Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-11-05 14:04 -0800
        Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-11-05 12:49 -1000
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-11-05 18:13 -0500
            Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-11-05 13:54 -1000
            Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-11-06 10:13 +0000
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2014-11-05 20:55 -0800
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-11-05 22:19 -0800
      Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-11-06 03:05 -0800
        Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-11-06 11:43 +0000
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-11-06 04:46 -0800
            Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-11-06 16:58 +0000
    Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-11-05 17:22 -0500
    Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2014-11-05 18:54 -0800
    Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-11-06 09:22 +0000
      Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-11-06 03:20 -0800
      Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-11-06 10:18 -0600
        Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-11-06 18:30 +0000
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-11-07 03:22 -0600
        Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? "Rod Pemberton" <buzzoff@nonamewhichexists.cmm> - 2014-11-06 16:57 -0500
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? forthisit@gmail.com - 2014-11-06 14:38 -0800
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-11-06 13:58 -1000
        Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-11-07 10:40 -0800
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-11-08 02:36 -0600
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-11-07 22:45 -1000
        Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-11-14 01:33 +0100
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-11-14 02:34 -0800
          Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-11-14 05:07 -0600
            Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-11-15 16:21 +0000
              Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-11-15 11:52 -0600
              Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-11-15 12:47 -0800
              Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-11-16 00:06 +0000
                Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-11-16 00:45 +0000
                Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-11-16 13:39 +0000
      Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-11-06 19:54 +0000
  Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2014-11-06 08:26 -0800
    Re: Does Forth solve the paradox? "Rod Pemberton" <buzzoff@nonamewhichexists.cmm> - 2014-11-06 16:57 -0500

csiph-web