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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #52344 > unrolled thread

Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation.

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-31 19:35 +0100
    Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. Kaz Kylheku <221-501-9011@kylheku.com> - 2016-10-31 19:15 +0000
      Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-31 23:34 -0700
        Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-03 11:33 -0700
          Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-03 21:59 -0700
            Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-03 22:26 -0700
      Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-01 13:03 +0100
    Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-08 18:56 -0800
      Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-09 10:45 +0100
        Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-09 13:34 +0100
          Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-09 13:34 +0000
            Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-11-09 07:59 -0800
              Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-09 17:34 +0000
              Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. november.nihal@gmail.com - 2016-11-09 14:06 -0800
              Re: Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-09 14:29 -1000

#52344 — Lisp in Forth. Stage 1: a silly reader, no evaluation.

This is an attempt at coding lisp in Forth directly from the description
by https://cse.sc.edu/~mgv/csce330f13/micromanualLISP.pdf
It is shamelessly ciforth dependant. You can run the code
published with lina or xina 5.x from the side below.

Preliminary. In the computer lisp things ("objects") need a
representation. They are handled by a dea, a (Forth) dictionary
entry address. All dea's for this purposes are indicated as "deal".
Lisp knows atoms and cons.
A dea has 5 fields cfa dfa ffa lfa nfa, which is sufficient to
accommodate this. The are abbreviations for
code, data, flag, link, name fields.
The dfa (data) can contain anything. The ffa (flag) contains 64
bit flags. The others contain pointers.
If a deal represents a symbol or number (atom), that symbol or number
is accessable as a string of char's, through the nfa, (name)
containing a pointer to possible dynamic storage.
If a deal represents a cons, mostly a list , the car and cdr are in dfa
resp lfa, the datafield and the link field.
If a handle represents an executable, its symbol is in nfa, and its
action is in cfa.
If a symbol has a value, that value must be a deal, it is stored in the dfa.

Lisp has one namespace, for regular atoms, and maybe another one for atoms
with an associated action. They are mapped on Forth namespaces.
The Forth namespace mechanism uses the lfa, which is free for that
use in atoms (not so in cons cells.)
Note that a list has no name. An atom can have a value that is a list,
which amounts to the same logically, but not implementationwise.

Note that in the deal of a cons 3 cells remain unused.
Of course cons cells will be simplified and dynamically allocated, if
this lisp becomes serious.

Implementing a lisp the forth way goes through a number of stages,
where at each stage limited functionality can be fully tested.
1. tiny silly lisp without eval.
 Silly means that blank space is required around punctuation. The
 REPL is reduced to RPL (pun intended.)
2. tiny lisp without eval.
Punctuation is handled in a lisp way. Stil RPL.
3. tiny lisp with eval.
Adds EQUAL and a general mechanism to add functions, defined in Forth.
Basic functions CONS EQUALP ATOMP etc. are now included.
4. tiny lisp without gc. This includes the lambda mechanism.
 There is a means (LABEL/DEFUN) to add functions to lisp without
 resort to Forth.
4a optional package to handle fixnums,
4b optional package to handle strings
(4c package that can be included to handle bignum etc. )
5. tiny lisp as a standalone executable.
Choice of optional packages burnt in.
No Forth crutches, or escapes, remain.
6. tiny lisp. Dynamic allocation of cons cell's and
 dynamic storage for types such as strings and bignums.

If we are ever to arrive at 6, the lisp will be baptized and
its name will be alif (a lisp in Forth).

This is the code for stage 1.
--------------------------------8<------------------------------
\ --------------- framework --------------------------------
NAMESPACE lisp                  : ATOMS lisp WORDS PREVIOUS ;
NAMESPACE lisp_actions          : ACTIONS lisp_actions WORDS PREVIOUS ;

WANT $-PREFIX 0<> TRUE $= :I

:I SDSWAP ROT ;
\ Bit in ffa : the deal is empty list. Leave 8 bits to Forth.
$100 CONSTANT nil_mask
\ Bit in ffa : the deal represents an atom.
$200 CONSTANT atom_mask
\ Bit in ffa : the deal is a list
$400 CONSTANT list_mask
\ Bit in ffa : the deal represents a number.
$1000 CONSTANT num_mask
\ Bit in ffa : the deal is executable [ PLUS as in (PLUS 12 3) ]
$2000 CONSTANT exe_mask
nil_mask 1- INVERT CONSTANT lisp_mask

\ Improve readability. (inlined).
:I CAR   >DFA @ ;        :I CDR   >LFA @ ;
:I CAR!  >DFA ! ;        :I CDR!   >LFA ! ;

\ --------------- reader --------------------------------

\ For  "string"  create its symbol, leave   deal
\ atoms perform the same code than `_ , put your own dea on the stack.
: ATOM:   NAME $, ALIGN   HERE
\   Code     Data   Flag      Link  Name
    '_ >CFA @ , 0 , atom_mask , 0 , SWAP  ,   DUP 'lisp >WID LINK ;
\ For  atom  get the value, its string.
: ATOM@   >NFA @ $@ ;

\ catch-all must be last word to be found, first to be defined.
lisp DEFINITIONS : catch-all ATOM: ;   PREFIX PREVIOUS DEFINITIONS

\ For  deal  return : "It  is  an atom/list/nil"  (Forth flag not lisp)
: ATOM?   >FFA @ atom_mask AND 0<> ;
: LIST?   >FFA @ list_mask AND 0<> ;
: NIL?   >FFA @ nil_mask AND 0<> ;

\ \ For  deal  return : "It  is  a number"
\ : NUM?  >FFA @ num_mask AND 0<> ;

\ From   deal  list  create a  list  with deal prepended.
: CONS   SWAP HERE ( cdfln)  0 , SWAP  , list_mask , SWAP , 0 , ;

\ For a   list  , return its content  cdr  and  car .
: CONS@ DUP CDR SWAP CAR ;

\ The infamous empty list and the symbol for trueity.
0 0 CONS CONSTANT NIL
NIL NIL CAR!   NIL NIL CDR!   NIL >FFA nil_mask atom_mask OR TOGGLE
ATOM: T CONSTANT T
\ For  0 deal deal .. deal  create a  list  .
: listed  NIL  BEGIN OVER  WHILE CONS REPEAT NIP ;
lisp DEFINITIONS
\ This is not an atom or a cons, but a constant with the address of NIL !
'NIL ALIAS NIL
\ Collect atoms until this closing bracked, return deal.
: ) PREVIOUS listed ;
: ( lisp 0 ;
PREVIOUS DEFINITIONS
\ Note AB is used in several other tests.
\ ------------------------------- printer -------------------------------
\ For all elements of a  list  , execute the  xt .
: FOR-LIST   >R  BEGIN DUP NIL <> WHILE CONS@ R@ EXECUTE REPEAT
   R> 2DROP ;

\ Print  deal  as a lisp entity.
:F .lisp ;
:R .lisp DUP LIST? IF &( EMIT '.lisp FOR-LIST &) EMIT SPACE ELSE
    ATOM@ TYPE SPACE THEN ;

\ --------------------- make the switch ---------------------------
lisp '( PREVIOUS  ALIAS (    \ Findable in Forth too.
\ Seals `lisp by patching `catch-all with an empty name.
lisp 'catch-all PREVIOUS "" $,   SWAP >NFA !
--------------------------------8<------------------------------

EXAMPLE :
 OK
( a b c ( WE GAAN NAAR ROME NIL ) ( ( ( ) ) ) X )
 OK
.lisp
(a b c (WE GAAN NAAR ROME () ) ((() ) ) X )  OK
ATOMS
   T   NIL   )   (   a   b   c   WE   GAAN   NAAR   ROME   X    OK

Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#52346

On 2016-10-31, Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> This is an attempt at coding lisp in Forth directly from the description
> by https://cse.sc.edu/~mgv/csce330f13/micromanualLISP.pdf
> It is shamelessly ciforth dependant. You can run the code
> published with lina or xina 5.x from the side below.

The "silly reader" is mainly the person following this stuff, I would
say.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52372

On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 2:15:15 PM UTC-5, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2016-10-31, Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > This is an attempt at coding lisp in Forth directly from the description
> > by https://cse.sc.edu/~mgv/csce330f13/micromanualLISP.pdf
> > It is shamelessly ciforth dependant. You can run the code
> > published with lina or xina 5.x from the side below.
> 
> The "silly reader" is mainly the person following this stuff, I would
> say.

I for one find this all fascinating. Why the negativity? Who's he harming?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52417

On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 11:34:32 PM UTC-7, luser droog wrote:
> On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 2:15:15 PM UTC-5, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > On 2016-10-31, Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > This is an attempt at coding lisp in Forth directly from the description
> > > by https://cse.sc.edu/~mgv/csce330f13/micromanualLISP.pdf
> > > It is shamelessly ciforth dependant. You can run the code
> > > published with lina or xina 5.x from the side below.
> > 
> > The "silly reader" is mainly the person following this stuff, I would
> > say.
> 
> I for one find this all fascinating. Why the negativity? Who's he harming?

Kaz Kylheku is a troll --- everything he says is negative.

See this thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.lang.lisp/fmite%7Csort:relevance/comp.lang.lisp/-nWfXAs_4ug/moiaKx78CPsJ

Here is what he said about my Stundurd processor-design that provides hardware-support for quotations:

On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 6:43:42 AM UTC-7, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2015-06-30, hughaguilar96@gmail.com <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, June 29, 2015 at 9:19:08 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> micro-controller code will become elegant (like Lisp but better) 
> >
> > When I say that LOTD is more elegant than Lisp, I am ...
> 
> ... lying drunk in a gutter, stumbling through Google Groups on a stolen
> tablet.
> 
> > you will have to read
> > the document to find out what this is.
> 
> Nobody is going to read your fucking document.

Pascal Bourguignon says: 
I'm beating you up for ... telling us that "GC is a no-go in a real-time system".

Really??? GC in a real-time micro-controller? That is a fantasy world.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52431

On Thursday, November 3, 2016 at 11:33:31 AM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> Kaz Kylheku is a troll --- everything he says is negative.
> 
> 

"Troll" isn't the first word that comes to my mind ...
 maybe something more like "douchelord" ...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douchelord

Mike B.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52432

On Thursday, November 3, 2016 at 11:59:49 PM UTC-5, Michael Barry wrote:
> On Thursday, November 3, 2016 at 11:33:31 AM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > Kaz Kylheku is a troll --- everything he says is negative.
> > 
> > 
> 
> "Troll" isn't the first word that comes to my mind ...
>  maybe something more like "douchelord" ...
> 
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=douchelord
> 

I see. I hadn't quite encountered that side of him yet.
With me he's been rude, but always with something
constructive that I could use. Which made the other
part easier to forgive.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52381

In article <20161031121441.814@kylheku.com>,
Kaz Kylheku  <221-501-9011@kylheku.com> wrote:
>On 2016-10-31, Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> This is an attempt at coding lisp in Forth directly from the description
>> by https://cse.sc.edu/~mgv/csce330f13/micromanualLISP.pdf
>> It is shamelessly ciforth dependant. You can run the code
>> published with lina or xina 5.x from the side below.
>
>The "silly reader" is mainly the person following this stuff, I would
>say.

At first I had an article that was more geared towards the lisp reader
with for each new definition an example, and explanations that do not
assume any Forth knowledge. It ran over 300 lines.
So I decided to publish an article that could be followed in detail by
a Forth reader and included the full code for experimenting. I hoped
that it still held some interest to lispers, hence the cross posting.

The long and probably more amenable first article can be seen at
http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst/forthlectureH.html

Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52474

On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 1:25:51 PM UTC-5, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> This is an attempt at coding lisp in Forth directly from the description
> by https://cse.sc.edu/~mgv/csce330f13/micromanualLISP.pdf

I was just browsing the SO [forth] tag and found

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/39980510/higher-level-language-from-stack-based-language

wherein there was this link

http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/160027/lisp-technically-scheme-written-in-forth

which I thought you ought to see.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52480

In article <5b4d0272-eafb-4759-a25d-6bc131f97004@googlegroups.com>,
luser droog  <mijoryx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 1:25:51 PM UTC-5, Albert van der Horst wrote:
>> This is an attempt at coding lisp in Forth directly from the description
>> by https://cse.sc.edu/~mgv/csce330f13/micromanualLISP.pdf
>
>I was just browsing the SO [forth] tag and found
>
>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/39980510/higher-level-language-from-stack-based-language
>
>wherein there was this link
>
>http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/160027/lisp-technically-scheme-written-in-forth
>
>which I thought you ought to see.

To my utmost surprise, when I tried to save it, it turns out I already had it.

Now I remember. This is a program in the worst Forth tradition, totally
undocumented, there is not even a readme claiming that this is a scheme. 1]
It only contains pseudo documentation in the form of stack comments, the
kind of information that comes free with C or Pascal headers.
There is an example but no clue how to run it.
ALLOCATE is used but no FREE so it doesn't do garbage collection.

I've collected half a dozen c-sources and one Pascal source, each of them does
a better job in explaining implementation details of Forth. Some of them
come
So I decided it was a waste of time.


1] Okay it is not *totally* undocumented. If you browse around on the
containing website you find
"
This is an interpreter for a really simple dynamically scoped Scheme
dialect. It only runs with Gforth, because it uses Gforth's structs to
implement its data structures. One of the more involved parts of this
interpreter is the reader, where I had to do quite a lot of stack
juggling to keep everything in line. It doesn't look very involved now
but I remember spending quite some time thinking about the stack
layout for the reader routines.
"
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52483

In article <nvur78$6d4$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl>,
Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:
>In article <5b4d0272-eafb-4759-a25d-6bc131f97004@googlegroups.com>,
>luser droog  <mijoryx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>On Monday, October 31, 2016 at 1:25:51 PM UTC-5, Albert van der Horst wrote:
>>> This is an attempt at coding lisp in Forth directly from the description
>>> by https://cse.sc.edu/~mgv/csce330f13/micromanualLISP.pdf
>>
>>I was just browsing the SO [forth] tag and found
>>
>>http://stackoverflow.com/questions/39980510/higher-level-language-from-stack-based-language
>>
>>wherein there was this link
>>
>>http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/160027/lisp-technically-scheme-written-in-forth
>>
>>which I thought you ought to see.
>
>To my utmost surprise, when I tried to save it, it turns out I already had it.
>
>Now I remember. This is a program in the worst Forth tradition, totally
>undocumented, there is not even a readme claiming that this is a scheme. 1]
>It only contains pseudo documentation in the form of stack comments, the
>kind of information that comes free with C or Pascal headers.
>There is an example but no clue how to run it.
>ALLOCATE is used but no FREE so it doesn't do garbage collection.
>
>I've collected half a dozen c-sources and one Pascal source, each of them does
>a better job in explaining implementation details of Forth. Some of them
                                                      ^^^^^
                                                      lisp
>come

The article got interrupted
Some of them come with very elaborate pdf documentation, e.g. lispkit.

>So I decided it was a waste of time.

So I decided this forth implementation was a waste of time.
Very annoying are the comments on stackoverflow that
make Forthers look like .. well look for yourself.

I quote
"
I guess the difference would be that Lisp could be running in Forth on
a Prop whereas there is no Lisp for the Prop but then again, there is
Forth for the Prop, so therefore there is Lisp for the Prop. Recurse
you Lisp!
"

The oversight is that lisp.fs runs on gforth, and not adhering to
a scheme or common lisp standard cannot use the libraries that
make lisp valuable.

I do not know the status of gforth on whatever the Prop is.
This much is sure that if it is on the "Prop" that means there
is gcc on the "Prop". If you want a lisp, then you can compile
e.g. clisp using gcc, instead of going via gforth and then this
program lisp.fs. Maybe, just maybe, you're better off then.

Forthers really can get overenthousiastic like the "1000 times less
code than c claim" that is sometimes seen.

>
>
>1] Okay it is not *totally* undocumented. If you browse around on the
>containing website you find
>"
>This is an interpreter for a really simple dynamically scoped Scheme
>dialect. It only runs with Gforth, because it uses Gforth's structs to
>implement its data structures. One of the more involved parts of this
>interpreter is the reader, where I had to do quite a lot of stack
>juggling to keep everything in line. It doesn't look very involved now
>but I remember spending quite some time thinking about the stack
>layout for the reader routines.
>"


>--
>Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
>Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
>albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
>
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52484

> In article <nvv54o$7bp$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl>, albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl says...

> >
> >I've collected half a dozen c-sources and one Pascal source, each of them does
> >a better job in explaining implementation details of Forth. Some of them
>                                                       ^^^^^
>                                                       lisp
> 

you might be interested in an article john posted on his website - I've just
added it to my forum link - relating to documentation and non-use
of forth
http://johntech.co.uk/html/idiotchild.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52485

On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:36:37 AM UTC-5, jim wrote:
> > In article <nvv54o$7bp$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl>, albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl says...
> 
> > >
> > >I've collected half a dozen c-sources and one Pascal source, each of them does
> > >a better job in explaining implementation details of Forth. Some of them
> >                                                       ^^^^^
> >                                                       lisp
> > 
> 
> you might be interested in an article john posted on his website - I've just
> added it to my forum link - relating to documentation and non-use
> of forth
> http://johntech.co.uk/html/idiotchild.html

There is a great amount of truth about Forth and the Forth community in this article.  The part about keeping the gold rather than making something with it
cuts close to the heart.

The author's recognition of the potential of Forth contrasted with the reality
is hard to hear.

I think the efforts by people here to provide Forth systems for the small boards
that are out in the market are a nice way to introduce Forth to a larger global
audience.

Exposure to engineering faculties and becoming part of curricula is another
avenue and boards with Forth systems and ideally exercises might be tempting
enough for profs to move forward. ?  But it requires a significant sales effort
so the board makers (TI maybe?) need to be part of the process.

However taking an evangelistic approach will never work well. It requires a 
business model where there is compensation for people's effort to motivate the 
masses.

I know, I know  "Thank you Captain obvious"

But business is not rocket science.

To business people it's just common sense and a lot of work.

BF

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52487

> In article <383e1358-6ae0-41b5-a601-1892f2175631@googlegroups.com>, foxaudioresearch@gmail.com says...

> 
> I know, I know  "Thank you Captain obvious"
> 
> But business is not rocket science.
> 
> To business people it's just common sense and a lot of work.
> 
> BF

I dont want to wade in here and fill the group with jibber jabber as a TV character might say
(thats why I did the forum) but I'm hoping what I'm working on might be just the business
spin needed  in the end. (But its a huge job  - early days still.)
Oddly enough - business is indeed rocket science for the boss
 (or anti-rocket to be more accurate)

I saw someone tried to post responses in the forum - For anyone not familiar with forums
you need to register before I can let you post. I've arranged it so you can stay anonymous
online if you wish - the boss is very big on that -  if you get stuck don't   be afraid to ask.
(You have my real name on the forum and know the domain name - use email if you must )

I'll point this response out to the author.
thanks BF

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52492

> There is a great amount of truth about Forth and the Forth community in this article.  The part about keeping the gold rather than making something with it
> cuts close to the heart.
> 
> The author's recognition of the potential of Forth contrasted with the reality
> is hard to hear.
> 
[snipped]

I was rather disappointed by the article linked. 

Comments such as arent helpful:

"Birth of the Idiot Child"

"Was the Forth language stillborn? "

"The Forth world has no impetus, no marketing, no functionally useful documentation, no educational thrust, no desire to spread..."  

"It is a world of hermits, jealously guarding their pot of gold, steadfastly refusing to beat the ore into cups and plates and knives and forks. The gold has become its own prize."

Just my 2 cents  ...

NN

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#52493

On 11/9/16 5:59 AM, foxaudioresearch@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:36:37 AM UTC-5, jim wrote:
>>> In article <nvv54o$7bp$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl>, albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl says...
>>
>>>>
>>>> I've collected half a dozen c-sources and one Pascal source, each of them does
>>>> a better job in explaining implementation details of Forth. Some of them
>>>                                                       ^^^^^
>>>                                                       lisp
>>>
>>
>> you might be interested in an article john posted on his website - I've just
>> added it to my forum link - relating to documentation and non-use
>> of forth
>> http://johntech.co.uk/html/idiotchild.html
>
> There is a great amount of truth about Forth and the Forth community in this
> article.  The part about keeping the gold rather than making something with it
> cuts close to the heart.
>
> The author's recognition of the potential of Forth contrasted with the reality
> is hard to hear.

It's sad that he didn't explore the "reality" a little bit further. He'd 
have found professional-grade products with extensive documentation, 
detailed books published on Amazon at reasonable cost, web sites of 
professional Forth programmers and programming services supporting 
professional application developers, and case histories of complex 
projects done in Forth.

> I think the efforts by people here to provide Forth systems for the small boards
> that are out in the market are a nice way to introduce Forth to a larger global
> audience.
>
> Exposure to engineering faculties and becoming part of curricula is another
> avenue and boards with Forth systems and ideally exercises might be tempting
> enough for profs to move forward. ?  But it requires a significant sales effort
> so the board makers (TI maybe?) need to be part of the process.

Several microprocessor and board suppliers have provided significant 
assistance to FORTH, Inc. and other vendors, and assisted with marketing.

> However taking an evangelistic approach will never work well. It requires a
> business model where there is compensation for people's effort to motivate the
> masses.
>
> I know, I know  "Thank you Captain obvious"
>
> But business is not rocket science.
>
> To business people it's just common sense and a lot of work.

Yes. FORTH, Inc. has been in that business successfully for over 40 
years, serving professional and amateur Forth programmers, providing 
training, documentation, and engineering services. MPE has been doing it 
almost that long.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web