Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Rod Pemberton" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Forth for education Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 13:09:04 -0400 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 63 Message-ID: References: <5235eb3d.280545989@news.demon.co.uk> <2263aaa0-10a9-4370-b65f-0fa2d3133dd5@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: CNsg4fVcCsvs3UaOgZtQCw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:25893 On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 02:23:30 -0400, wrote: > On Friday, September 20, 2013 5:10:27 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote: >> On Fri, 20 Sep 2013 18:00:12 -0400, Elizabeth D. Rather >> wrote: ... >> > What gets our backs up is folks who insist on slamming Forth because >> > it's different from their favorite language, whatever it is. >> >> So, Hugh, who codes in Forth and hates C, slammed Forth by pointing out >> that Forth lacks syntax? Are you confused? You could say that about >> me (wrongly), because I like C. But, how do you say that about someone >> who loves Forth? It's not "different from [his] favorite language". >> I.e., your argument only holds up in your mind when you can accuse >> someone of not loving Forth more than some other language, i.e., >> your bigoted. If Hugh had asked to discuss the lack of syntax issue, >> which he brought up, would you have been as offended as me continuing >> the conversation? You don't like him. He trashes you. What about >> Alex, Bruce, Bernd? Favoritism. > > I didn't "slam Forth by pointing out that Forth lacks syntax." That is > putting words in my mouth. I didn't say you did. The question was me expressing Ms. Rather's apparent perception of events. She complained about people "slamming Forth" - quoted directly above - because it wasn't their favorite language. You were the one who cited Forth's lack of syntax via a concrete example - now snipped. I said she shouldn't say that about you because you love Forth and hate C - still quoted above. I initially took issue because *many* of those here have cited concrete examples of issues with Forth's lack of syntax and other issues over the years, but any attempts to discuss lack of syntax in general, or directly, it are met with anger and hostility as if these issues are taboo. I was pointing out the apparent contradiction of not discussing certain issues while people are citing concrete examples of those exact issues as problems. What is up with everyone's comprehension here lately? It's like people are selecting what they want, not what was said, and responding to that instead... > I do have a lot of complaints about ANS-Forth, but syntax isn't > one of them. The lack of structs is what I brought up in this thread. Lack of structs is concrete example of lack of syntax... > Lack of closures is another complaint I've brought up in the past, > but C doesn't have closures either, and most C programmers don't even > know what they are (most Forth programmers, including Elizabeth Rather, > don't know either). AFAICT, they aren't necessary. > Also, btw, I don't really "hate C." I've worked as a C programmer. Said the guy with one C rant after rant after rant after rant ... Rod Pemberton