Re: machineforth != forth?

Path	csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	"Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: machineforth != forth?
Date	Fri, 21 Aug 2015 07:19:40 -0400
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines	32
Message-ID	<op.x3ptq2izyfako5@localhost> (permalink)
References	<5cf160f0-e431-4309-b45a-70db3e6c9d79@googlegroups.com> <mr2q24$rce$2@dont-email.me> <1fffb5d0-9a3f-4de4-81d9-0dbf73b4df55@googlegroups.com> <b55943bb-f202-44f0-9f5e-6c8c43397974@googlegroups.com> <e475f16b-4d1b-43ad-899c-66e4f94cd970@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host	n4wpt9zq8xR26Ttf9mo2BA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; 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:41436

Show key headers only | View raw

On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 04:46:55 -0400, <m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl> wrote:

> I am not a big KISS proponent, but lately it has become clear to
> me that any program / programming system will develop into a
> monster of complexity over its lifetime (look at SPICE or Matlab,
> or gcc, or Linux ...). One should fight that, but not every battle
> needs to be or can be won.

I usually keep C programs small and dedicated for just this reason.

We've all seen the massively bloated Linux utilities, which do way
too much, have way too many parameters.  Yet, you can't use that one
utility to get the job done.  You still need two more utilities, each
of which do basically the same thing as the first, but they have one
additional feature the others don't have, which is needed to get the
job done.

e.g.,

'ps -e' and 'kill' versus 'pkill'
'du' versus 'df'
'find' versus 'ls'
'nc' versus 'nmap','telnet','ping'

Why are there three web browsers installed in Linux?

Rod Pemberton

-- 
Scientists now say we'll experience a mini-ice in 2030.
So, I guess we need more global warming today ...

Thread

machineforth != forth? Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-08-19 13:28 -0700
  Re: machineforth != forth? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-08-19 22:49 +0200
    Re: machineforth != forth? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2015-08-20 00:13 -0700
      Re: machineforth != forth? Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-08-20 13:05 +0200
      Re: machineforth != forth? Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 20:29 -0700
        Re: machineforth != forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-20 21:28 -0700
          Re: machineforth != forth? "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-08-21 07:11 -0400
            Re: machineforth != forth? Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-08-21 23:23 +0100
              Re: machineforth != forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-21 21:06 -0700
                Re: machineforth != forth? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-21 21:41 -0700
                Re: machineforth != forth? Matthias Trute <matthias.trute@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 01:29 -0700
        Re: machineforth != forth? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2015-08-21 01:46 -0700
          Re: machineforth != forth? "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-08-21 07:19 -0400
            Re: machineforth != forth? dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-08-27 21:42 +0000
  Re: machineforth != forth? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-08-20 08:10 +0000
    Re: machineforth != forth? Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-08-20 14:11 +0200

csiph-web