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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #49723 > unrolled thread

The power of Forth

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

Contents

  The power of Forth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 00:17 -0700
    Re: The power of Forth Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 11:03 -0700
      Re: The power of Forth endlessboomcapitalism@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 09:45 -0700
        Re: The power of Forth endlessboomcapitalism@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 20:11 -0700
      Re: The power of Forth polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 16:06 -0700
    Re: The power of Forth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-02 14:26 -0700
      Re: The power of Forth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 08:37 -0700
    Re: The weakness of Forth "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-03 18:24 +0000
    Re: The power of Forth mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-08-05 20:33 -0700
    Re: The power of Forth lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-07 16:05 -0700
      Re: The power of Forth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-08 11:26 +1000
        Re: The power of Forth lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-09 19:01 -0700
          Re: The power of Forth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 22:03 -0700
            Re: The power of Forth Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 06:06 -0700
              Re: The power of Forth Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-10 10:15 -0500
              Re: The power of Forth Bill Zimmerly <billzimmerly@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 11:54 -0700
                Re: The power of Forth polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 16:08 -0700
              Re: The power of Forth Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 05:22 -0700
                Re: The power of Forth endlessboomcapitalism@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 20:34 -0700
              Re: The power of Forth polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 16:07 -0700
      Re: The power of Forth lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 18:56 -0700
    Re: The power of Forth endlessboomcapitalism@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 09:42 -0700
      Re: The power of Forth JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-08-13 12:26 -0700
        Re: The power of Forth endlessboomcapitalism@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 20:11 -0700
          Re: The power of Forth JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-08-14 22:58 -0700
            Re: The power of Forth polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 16:09 -0700
            Re: The power of Forth polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 16:09 -0700
            Re: The power of Forth polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 16:09 -0700
    Re: The power of Forth polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 16:05 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#49723 — The power of Forth

I'm retired now and I've never worked as a programmer. Once I did a job search as a programmer. There where 400 participants, 10 was to be selected by an IQ test to be interviewed and one person got the job: programming salary routines in PL/I. I don´t know what went wrong, the boss and the union seemed enthusiastic about me, but a consultant didn't. I guess it's some kind of inversion phenomena, the most "attractive" jobs are distributed in less visible canals and there is a "cover" and a stratification above keeping the working class in its place.

Later I bought my first computer, a TI-99/A with built in Basic which almost made me give up. Almost nothing was possible. Then I found the Swedish TI-user club, which distributed a Fig-Forth and I become obsessed. It was like being released from a prison. I become active in the club and started to write about Forth in the club magazine. I also started a class about Forth on a BBS with some enthusiastic and talented youth. Some time after the murder of the Swedish prime minister Olof Palme a person phoned me and asked me to work in his company as a Forth programmer. But this murder really made me depressed. I couldn't enjoy programming or math anymore. I become obsessed to understand the murder. So I told him I couldn't take the job but gave him a hint about one of the Forth entusiasts on the BBS class, which got the job but later told me that the company gave up Forth and he had to program in c, which he hated.

After founding out why and by whom Olof Palme was killed my former interest of Forth started to grow again. In my first Forth period I had a focus at what was "under the hood" but now I started to make applications - also this time just for fun. Having an idea of a program and realize it is very funny - when not being discouraged by the system. However, it was disturbing that I had a fairly powerful computer which only could handle integers of a very restricted size. I decided to develop arithmetic for number strings. Then I had to optimize and BigInt become almost not slow. I'm really proud of BigInt and Zet, my implementation of nested sets, now merged to BigZ. I know that Forth is the great power making this possible for me to do. Forth is like some project of DARPA making amazing things possible. I know that other people with other programming languages makes 100 times faster routines than me, but I couldn't do this at all without Forth. (Besides, these programmers have the advantage that they cooperate instead of wining and hesitating).

I believe in Jesus, who often reminded his disciples that the honor belongs to God. To the Creator. A lot of religious people really longing for the honor them selves, but there is no way from there. Humility is the only possibility. In the community of Forth we have a great creator (lower case c in 'creator' though) who invented Forth, the whole idea. I don't say that forthers should worship Charles Moore, but he really invented this thing that make us capable to program with extended power, which  sometimes making us believe that WE are the masterminds. Forth community should really cooperate on a standard by using it and enhancing it. It's about  developing a useful compromise. 

And we should be more realistic about our programming abilities and give more of the honor to the inventor.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#49740

On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 12:17:28 AM UTC-7, lehs wrote:
> Humility is the only possibility. In the community of Forth we have a great creator (lower case c in 'creator' though) who invented Forth, the whole idea. I don't say that forthers should worship Charles Moore, but he really invented this thing that make us capable to program with extended power, which  sometimes making us believe that WE are the masterminds. Forth community should really cooperate on a standard by using it and enhancing it. It's about  developing a useful compromise. 

Yes, if you need some humility beaten into you, programming is the tool for the job. Of course, Forth is supposed to be fun. If programming is fun, you will be much more productive. Maybe Forth is an illustration that most programming languages are the products of people's minds with little basis in physical evidence. Like religions, which to me that perhaps religion should be fun too.

Chuck's biggest contribution, besides producing Forth through relentless optimization, was to teach people to think outside the box. I would say the ANS Standard is Elizabeth's contribution. Herding this species of cat required the patience of a saint. I think most Forth programmers use the standard because it's the most convenient way to use Forth. Nothing prevents one from doing non-standard things as long as they are documented and contained.

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

#50037

On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 2:03:11 PM UTC-4, Brad Eckert wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 12:17:28 AM UTC-7, lehs wrote:
> > Humility is the only possibility. In the community of Forth we have a great creator (lower case c in 'creator' though) who invented Forth, the whole idea. I don't say that forthers should worship Charles Moore, but he really invented this thing that make us capable to program with extended power, which  sometimes making us believe that WE are the masterminds. Forth community should really cooperate on a standard by using it and enhancing it. It's about  developing a useful compromise. 
> 
> Yes, if you need some humility beaten into you, programming is the tool for the job. Of course, Forth is supposed to be fun. If programming is fun, you will be much more productive. Maybe Forth is an illustration that most programming languages are the products of people's minds with little basis in physical evidence. Like religions, which to me that perhaps religion should be fun too.
> 
> Chuck's biggest contribution, besides producing Forth through relentless optimization, was to teach people to think outside the box. I would say the ANS Standard is Elizabeth's contribution. Herding this species of cat required the patience of a saint. I think most Forth programmers use the standard because it's the most convenient way to use Forth. Nothing prevents one from doing non-standard things as long as they are documented and contained.

werc.cat-v.org seems a shortcut to web site making

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

#50123

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 12:45:08 PM UTC-4, endlessboo...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 2:03:11 PM UTC-4, Brad Eckert wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 12:17:28 AM UTC-7, lehs wrote:
> > > Humility is the only possibility. In the community of Forth we have a great creator (lower case c in 'creator' though) who invented Forth, the whole idea. I don't say that forthers should worship Charles Moore, but he really invented this thing that make us capable to program with extended power, which  sometimes making us believe that WE are the masterminds. Forth community should really cooperate on a standard by using it and enhancing it. It's about  developing a useful compromise. 
> > 
> > Yes, if you need some humility beaten into you, programming is the tool for the job. Of course, Forth is supposed to be fun. If programming is fun, you will be much more productive. Maybe Forth is an illustration that most programming languages are the products of people's minds with little basis in physical evidence. Like religions, which to me that perhaps religion should be fun too.
> > 
> > Chuck's biggest contribution, besides producing Forth through relentless optimization, was to teach people to think outside the box. I would say the ANS Standard is Elizabeth's contribution. Herding this species of cat required the patience of a saint. I think most Forth programmers use the standard because it's the most convenient way to use Forth. Nothing prevents one from doing non-standard things as long as they are documented and contained.
> 
> werc.cat-v.org seems a shortcut to web site making

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dCVKEah6hs&list=RDxLInwHuCZM8&index=4

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

#51199

On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 2:03:11 PM UTC-4, Brad Eckert wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 12:17:28 AM UTC-7, lehs wrote:
> > Humility is the only possibility. In the community of Forth we have a great creator (lower case c in 'creator' though) who invented Forth, the whole idea. I don't say that forthers should worship Charles Moore, but he really invented this thing that make us capable to program with extended power, which  sometimes making us believe that WE are the masterminds. Forth community should really cooperate on a standard by using it and enhancing it. It's about  developing a useful compromise. 
> 
> Yes, if you need some humility beaten into you, programming is the tool for the job. Of course, Forth is supposed to be fun. If programming is fun, you will be much more productive. Maybe Forth is an illustration that most programming languages are the products of people's minds with little basis in physical evidence. Like religions, which to me that perhaps religion should be fun too.
> 
> Chuck's biggest contribution, besides producing Forth through relentless optimization, was to teach people to think outside the box. I would say the ANS Standard is Elizabeth's contribution. Herding this species of cat required the patience of a saint. I think most Forth programmers use the standard because it's the most convenient way to use Forth. Nothing prevents one from doing non-standard things as long as they are documented and contained.

are the apps really nice and fast that chuck made?

I havent seen any in action.

His work seems genius

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

#49750

On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 12:17:28 AM UTC-7, lehs wrote:
> Forth community should really cooperate on a standard by using it and enhancing it. It's about  developing a useful compromise. 

I agree with this.

I said previously:

On Wednesday, May 4, 2016 at 5:03:16 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> People can do whatever they want, so long as they adhere to the basic principles:
> 
> 1.) Minimalism. All that cruft in ANS-Forth will be discarded (for example: DO loops will go). I would expect the language to be less than half the size of ANS-Forth. As for the extension code-libraries, they will make the language bigger, but they are optional. They are containers (my list.4th and association.4th) or they are associated with a particular data-type (my string-stack.4th). The emphasis here should be on usefulness --- I was impressed by how Factor used "sequences" as a standard data-type, and this was my inspiration for list.4th --- also, almost all programs for desktop-computers are going to use strings, so having a standard library such as string-stack.4th is going to make the programs easy to read, rather than everybody doing something different in every program.
> 
> 2.) Behavior. The focus should be on standardizing behavior rather than implementation. One of the problems with ANS-Forth was that it standardized implementation. For example, ANS-Forth assumes that the >R data and the DO loops use the same stack, so they were standardizing on the PDP-11 implementation that had to do this because of a shortage of registers. Quite a lot of ANS-Forth assumes that the target processor is a PDP-11, apparently because that is the only processor that Elizabeth Rather is familiar with.
> 
> 3.) Quotations. My system with the fat-xt will be used to allow quotations to access the parent function's local variables. This is trivial to implement! This is the foundation to writing general-purpose data-structures --- I really see this as bring Forth into the 21st century --- make it comparable to the other desktop-computer language such as Lisp --- unlike Lisp though, we will not have garbage-collection or tagged data (we will not have Dynamic-OOP). The emphasis will still be on speed, and Dynamic-OOP is a dog, so leave that to the script kiddies.
> 
> 4.) Numerical. The 64-bit cell with the Fixed or Float data-type is fundamental to the language. I think this makes the language much simpler than ANS-Forth where integers and floats are distinct (so, this fits in with the minimalism idea). The "killer app" is CAM, but most machinists have experience primarily with using pocket calculators for figuring out gcode, and pocket calculators don't consider integers and floats to be distinct data-types. Also, it is important to define what the precision of the numbers is in the standard so the programmer knows what the results of numerical calculations are going to be and can expect the same results on every compliant compiler (so long as he sticks with either the Fixed or Float version, as they give different results from each other). I originally was only going to have the Fixed version, but Ilya Vasilyev convinced me to have a Float version also and to make them compatible with each other (except for a slight difference in the numeric results in some cases). This was here:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.lang.forth/ilya%7Csort:date/comp.lang.forth/R7K3FWXnyKE/0_LJ13ZfBQAJ
> 
> 5.) Cross-Compilation. The compiler should have all the necessary features for writing a cross-compiler. This is actually pretty easy --- it is amazing that ANS-Forth failed at such a simple task (I'm highly suspicious that ANS-Forth was purposely sabotaged to make cross-compilation difficult in order to prevent common users from writing a cross-compiler in competition with Forth Inc. and MPE who make most of their money selling vendor-specific cross-compilers) --- I know how to write a cross-compiler, so I will make sure that this is supported.
> 
> These are the 5 principles of Straight-Forth. Who disagrees with any of these principles? Which ones? Why?
> 
> Note that LFTforth is for micro-controllers and would have different principles that it is based on --- that is really Raimond's thing, not mine.

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

#49790

Den tisdag 2 augusti 2016 kl. 23:26:49 UTC+2 skrev hughag...@gmail.com:
> On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 12:17:28 AM UTC-7, lehs wrote:
> > Forth community should really cooperate on a standard by using it and enhancing it. It's about  developing a useful compromise. 
> 
> I agree with this.
> 
> I said previously:
> 
> On Wednesday, May 4, 2016 at 5:03:16 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > People can do whatever they want, so long as they adhere to the basic principles:
> > 
> > 1.) Minimalism. All that cruft in ANS-Forth will be discarded (for example: DO loops will go). I would expect the language to be less than half the size of ANS-Forth. As for the extension code-libraries, they will make the language bigger, but they are optional. They are containers (my list.4th and association.4th) or they are associated with a particular data-type (my string-stack.4th). The emphasis here should be on usefulness --- I was impressed by how Factor used "sequences" as a standard data-type, and this was my inspiration for list.4th --- also, almost all programs for desktop-computers are going to use strings, so having a standard library such as string-stack.4th is going to make the programs easy to read, rather than everybody doing something different in every program.
> > 
> > 2.) Behavior. The focus should be on standardizing behavior rather than implementation. One of the problems with ANS-Forth was that it standardized implementation. For example, ANS-Forth assumes that the >R data and the DO loops use the same stack, so they were standardizing on the PDP-11 implementation that had to do this because of a shortage of registers. Quite a lot of ANS-Forth assumes that the target processor is a PDP-11, apparently because that is the only processor that Elizabeth Rather is familiar with.
> > 
> > 3.) Quotations. My system with the fat-xt will be used to allow quotations to access the parent function's local variables. This is trivial to implement! This is the foundation to writing general-purpose data-structures --- I really see this as bring Forth into the 21st century --- make it comparable to the other desktop-computer language such as Lisp --- unlike Lisp though, we will not have garbage-collection or tagged data (we will not have Dynamic-OOP). The emphasis will still be on speed, and Dynamic-OOP is a dog, so leave that to the script kiddies.
> > 
> > 4.) Numerical. The 64-bit cell with the Fixed or Float data-type is fundamental to the language. I think this makes the language much simpler than ANS-Forth where integers and floats are distinct (so, this fits in with the minimalism idea). The "killer app" is CAM, but most machinists have experience primarily with using pocket calculators for figuring out gcode, and pocket calculators don't consider integers and floats to be distinct data-types. Also, it is important to define what the precision of the numbers is in the standard so the programmer knows what the results of numerical calculations are going to be and can expect the same results on every compliant compiler (so long as he sticks with either the Fixed or Float version, as they give different results from each other). I originally was only going to have the Fixed version, but Ilya Vasilyev convinced me to have a Float version also and to make them compatible with each other (except for a slight difference in the numeric results in some cases). This was here:
> > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.lang.forth/ilya%7Csort:date/comp.lang.forth/R7K3FWXnyKE/0_LJ13ZfBQAJ
> > 
> > 5.) Cross-Compilation. The compiler should have all the necessary features for writing a cross-compiler. This is actually pretty easy --- it is amazing that ANS-Forth failed at such a simple task (I'm highly suspicious that ANS-Forth was purposely sabotaged to make cross-compilation difficult in order to prevent common users from writing a cross-compiler in competition with Forth Inc. and MPE who make most of their money selling vendor-specific cross-compilers) --- I know how to write a cross-compiler, so I will make sure that this is supported.
> > 
> > These are the 5 principles of Straight-Forth. Who disagrees with any of these principles? Which ones? Why?
> > 
> > Note that LFTforth is for micro-controllers and would have different principles that it is based on --- that is really Raimond's thing, not mine.

If you would tone down your antagonism against Elisabeth Rather clf would be a lot more constructive. I'm as suspicious as you when it comes to businesses - only the worst sort of businessmen make money on charity, the rest fight with other means.

I think your ideas of a minimal Forth without built in restrictions is a great idea. It could be a sort of anti-standard in a dialectic process: standard --> antistandard --> enhanced standard. Or even conquer the given standard.

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

#49773 — Re: The weakness of Forth

lehs wrote:

> In my first Forth period I
> had a focus at what was
> "under the hood" but now I
> started to make applications
> - also this time just for
> fun. Having an idea of a
> program and realize it is
> very funny - when not being
> discouraged by the system.
> However, it was disturbing
> that I had a fairly powerful
> computer which only could
> handle integers of a very
> restricted size.

Ruby:

s = '
In my first Forth period I
had a focus at what was
"under the hood" but now I
started to make applications
- also this time just for
fun. Having an idea of a
program and realize it is
very funny - when not being
discouraged by the system.
However, it was disturbing
that I had a fairly powerful
computer which only could
handle integers of a very
restricted size.'

s.gsub(/\s+/," ").scan(/F\w+|\w\w(?= ve)|\w+ \w+ric\w+/).join ' '
 ===>
"Forth is very restricted"

-- 
In Stockholm ... 20 Muslim men ... began to assault the children, ripping their
swimsuits off and beating the boys when they tried to stop the assault....
[T]he men cornered one of the [11-year-old] girls in a grotto in the bathhouse
and gang raped her.  The police refused to press any charges.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=807_1369627137

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

#49804

On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 12:17:28 AM UTC-7, lehs wrote:
> Forth is like some project of DARPA making amazing things possible. 

Forth is going to power the AGI Revolution. 

http://ai.neocities.org/SOTA.html 

Bye

Mentifex (Arthur) 
-- 
http://ai.neocities.org/forthagi.txt 
http://robots.net/person/AI4U/diary/81.html 
http://github.com/PriorArt/AGI/blob/master/ghost.pl 
http://www.sourcecodeonline.com/details/ghost_perl_webserver_strong_ai.html 

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

#49860

On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 7:17:28 PM UTC+12, lehs wrote:
> I believe in Jesus, who often reminded his disciples that the honor belongs
> to God.

But Jesus *was* God <http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/jesus_god.html>.

Or was he?

One of the things you learn about computers is that they need things spelled out exactly correctly. Otherwise they don’t work.

Religion doesn’t need things spelled out this correctly. That’s because, even when religions don’t work, you can still believe they do!

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

#49862

lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 7:17:28 PM UTC+12, lehs wrote:
> > I believe in Jesus, who often reminded his disciples that the honor belongs
> > to God.
>
> But Jesus *was* God <http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/jesus_god.html>.
>
> Or was he?
>
> One of the things you learn about computers is that they need things spelled out
> exactly correctly. Otherwise they don't work.
>
> Religion doesn't need things spelled out this correctly. That's because, even when
> religions don't work, you can still believe they do!

Computers only require things spelled out correctly at the lowest level
i.e. its machine code.  There are as many ways to get there as there
are humans with imagination.  Doesn't that sound like religion? :)

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

#49917

On Monday, August 8, 2016 at 1:22:50 PM UTC+12, HAA wrote:

> There are as many ways to get there as there are humans with imagination.
> Doesn't that sound like religion? :)

Ah, if only that were true. But different religions do not lead to the same place. For example, different religions usually have different ideas about morality. And being religions based on subjective belief, you cannot argue with them. But morality should be something we all share in common as human beings, not something that is justified purely based on what religion you happen to follow.

“The greatest tragedy in human history may be the hijacking of morality by religion.”
        -- Arthur C Clarke

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

#49918

Den onsdag 10 augusti 2016 kl. 04:01:08 UTC+2 skrev lawren...@gmail.com:
> On Monday, August 8, 2016 at 1:22:50 PM UTC+12, HAA wrote:
> 
> > There are as many ways to get there as there are humans with imagination.
> > Doesn't that sound like religion? :)
> 
> Ah, if only that were true. But different religions do not lead to the same place. For example, different religions usually have different ideas about morality. And being religions based on subjective belief, you cannot argue with them. But morality should be something we all share in common as human beings, not something that is justified purely based on what religion you happen to follow.
> 
> “The greatest tragedy in human history may be the hijacking of morality by religion.”
>         -- Arthur C Clarke

Subjective belief is natural and a consequence of being interested without knowing. Religion is the strive to standardize the lack of knowledge and the lack of moral. I guess that science is the religion of the future.

I believe in Jesus in the senses that I don't think he was a liar or a fabulist and that I have come to a conclusion what he really said. In the same sense I also believe in Einstein and Moore and a lot of other people.

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

#49921

The thing about Forth that makes it so interesting, powerful, and different 
from every other programming language is that it puts absolutely no constraints 
on the programmer. That is an amazing thing.

But to some people, it can also be overwhelming and intimidating. When there 
are no constraints on one, it can be hard to decide how to do something. It 
takes a completely different mindset and approach.

I am reminded of a story I read about the Russian people after the fall of the 
USSR. The story said they had lived with so few choices for so long that they
had a difficult time adjusting to the freedom and people got overwhelmed when
faces with so many options. Of course, it didn't apply to ALL Russians, but
you get the idea (I hope).

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

#49922

On 8/10/2016 8:06 AM, Chris Curl wrote:
> The thing about Forth that makes it so interesting, powerful, and different
> from every other programming language is that it puts absolutely no constraints
> on the programmer. That is an amazing thing.
>
> But to some people, it can also be overwhelming and intimidating. When there
> are no constraints on one, it can be hard to decide how to do something. It
> takes a completely different mindset and approach.
>
> I am reminded of a story I read about the Russian people after the fall of the
> USSR. The story said they had lived with so few choices for so long that they
> had a difficult time adjusting to the freedom and people got overwhelmed when
> faces with so many options. Of course, it didn't apply to ALL Russians, but
> you get the idea (I hope).
>
Add to that in its basic form, its so simple and as you mentioned 
powerful at the same time. It is a strange thing to watch adherents of 
Forth try to put so many artificial limits on the language in the name 
of "the Spirit of Forth" yet Forth's one  great capability is to be able 
change itself to create a problem oriented language to make solving a 
programming problem a simple and natural task.

There are many  languages that are great at solving  certain kinds of 
problems, they do so by having a very rigid way of solving the problem, 
but everything is those languages is not undesirable. Exposure to some 
of these languages makes one aware that there are many ways to solve 
problems so one should embrace the flexibility and freedom of Forth and 
take the best of ideas and embrace them, there is no need to be afraid 
of choices.
-- 
Cecil - k5nwa

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

#49929

On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 8:06:10 AM UTC-5, Chris Curl wrote:
> The thing about Forth that makes it so interesting, powerful, and different 
> from every other programming language is that it puts absolutely no constraints 
> on the programmer. That is an amazing thing.

Precisely! Freedom is an amazing thing.

> But to some people, it can also be overwhelming and intimidating. When there 
> are no constraints on one, it can be hard to decide how to do something. It 
> takes a completely different mindset and approach.

It can also be a frightening thing too...

"Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."
- George Bernard Shaw

> I am reminded of a story I read about the Russian people after the fall of the 
> USSR. The story said they had lived with so few choices for so long that they
> had a difficult time adjusting to the freedom and people got overwhelmed when
> faces with so many options. Of course, it didn't apply to ALL Russians, but
> you get the idea (I hope).

Herein is the real power of LIBERTY ... it makes progress possible!

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
- George Bernard Shaw

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

#51201

On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 2:54:52 PM UTC-4, Bill Zimmerly wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 8:06:10 AM UTC-5, Chris Curl wrote:
> > The thing about Forth that makes it so interesting, powerful, and different 
> > from every other programming language is that it puts absolutely no constraints 
> > on the programmer. That is an amazing thing.
> 
> Precisely! Freedom is an amazing thing.
> 
> > But to some people, it can also be overwhelming and intimidating. When there 
> > are no constraints on one, it can be hard to decide how to do something. It 
> > takes a completely different mindset and approach.
> 
> It can also be a frightening thing too...
> 
> "Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."
> - George Bernard Shaw
> 
> > I am reminded of a story I read about the Russian people after the fall of the 
> > USSR. The story said they had lived with so few choices for so long that they
> > had a difficult time adjusting to the freedom and people got overwhelmed when
> > faces with so many options. Of course, it didn't apply to ALL Russians, but
> > you get the idea (I hope).
> 
> Herein is the real power of LIBERTY ... it makes progress possible!
> 
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
> - George Bernard Shaw

unregulated capitalism all the way
end the fed adn 99% of government jobs
contracts and no initiation of force
thats it
no building codes unions or government funed university or schools
fire all judge n lawyer replace with computer
1 vote 1 veto, no law unless 100% agree

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

#49995

среда, 10 августа 2016 г., 16:06:10 UTC+3 пользователь Chris Curl написал:

> I am reminded of a story I read about the Russian people after the fall of the 
> USSR. The story said they had lived with so few choices for so long that they
> had a difficult time adjusting to the freedom and people got overwhelmed when
> faces with so many options. Of course, it didn't apply to ALL Russians, but
> you get the idea (I hope).

It is better to not rely on this too much. It was a stupid enough behavior indeed from a part of Soviet peoples who was too focused on financial side of life. They thought freedom means 'a lot of possibilities to buy things', as it was agressively propaganded on 90-th. It is better to look on a list of Russian/Soviet scientists, composers, writers and other peoples with freedom to create (instead of freedom to buy and own).

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

#50124

On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 8:22:06 AM UTC-4, Ilya Tarasov wrote:
> среда, 10 августа 2016 г., 16:06:10 UTC+3 пользователь Chris Curl написал:
> 
> > I am reminded of a story I read about the Russian people after the fall of the 
> > USSR. The story said they had lived with so few choices for so long that they
> > had a difficult time adjusting to the freedom and people got overwhelmed when
> > faces with so many options. Of course, it didn't apply to ALL Russians, but
> > you get the idea (I hope).
> 
> It is better to not rely on this too much. It was a stupid enough behavior indeed from a part of Soviet peoples who was too focused on financial side of life. They thought freedom means 'a lot of possibilities to buy things', as it was agressively propaganded on 90-th. It is better to look on a list of Russian/Soviet scientists, composers, writers and other peoples with freedom to create (instead of freedom to buy and own).

freedom to own and property as an individual right is how you get great world liek hong kong and usa

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

#51200

On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 9:06:10 AM UTC-4, Chris Curl wrote:
> The thing about Forth that makes it so interesting, powerful, and different 
> from every other programming language is that it puts absolutely no constraints 
> on the programmer. That is an amazing thing.
> 
> But to some people, it can also be overwhelming and intimidating. When there 
> are no constraints on one, it can be hard to decide how to do something. It 
> takes a completely different mindset and approach.
> 
> I am reminded of a story I read about the Russian people after the fall of the 
> USSR. The story said they had lived with so few choices for so long that they
> had a difficult time adjusting to the freedom and people got overwhelmed when
> faces with so many options. Of course, it didn't apply to ALL Russians, but
> you get the idea (I hope).

I wana visit russia, heard some hot women.
Trump will make relations great again.

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web