Re: Standard or Forth?

From	Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Standard or Forth?
Date	2016-09-04 07:35 +0100
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<nqgfbv$ohl$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(6 earlier) <nq12qv$kdj$1@dont-email.me> <nq13gd$mtl$1@dont-email.me> <nq5bk3$j2e$1@dont-email.me> <nq8882$3l2$1@gioia.aioe.org> <eeb99718-0245-48eb-98ea-0aa2cb0c98fe@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 03/09/2016 05:54, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
> This is what Charles Moore was referring to when he said:
>"Any spirit of innovation has been thoroughly squelched."
> At the time that Straight Forth is released, when the
> ANS-Forth cult is striving mightily to squelch it, I will
> have difficulty in fixing any mistakes that made it into
> the design, because doing so will involve admitting that
> I was wrong about something --- it is best if I wait until
> I'm absolutely sure that there are no mistakes --- I
> should really write one or two non-trivial programs in
> Straight Forth before I even consider releasing it publicly.

Very wise, nothing kills an interest in software than finding it is 
bug-ridden. However this requires more than just a couple of non-trivial 
programs to be written before release, it requires a comprehensive set 
of test programs which test, not only the basic features but corner 
cases, and include them with the system. This is also true for 
applications and libraries. Few people seem to do this even though it is 
in the developers' interest to do so.

> There is no hurry. Forth-200x is now Forth-201x, and will be
> Forth-202x pretty soon, and will likely be Forth-203x when it
> is finally completed --- Forth-200x just gets more and more
> complicated every year! --- there are extremely bad ideas
> already in Forth-200x, such as recognizers and Paysan-faked
> quotations, and these bad ideas have already doomed Forth-200x
> to failure.

Aren't quotations and recognisers innovations for Forth and you are 
doing your best to squelch them. It seems to me that you and others in 
the anti-ANS/Forth200X brigade do the vast majority of any squelching 
that is going on, without much apparent success though. I see little 
squelching from the supporters of Forth 200X, they seem to mostly ignore 
you, particularly the ones you regularly insult.

-- 
Gerry

Thread

Rosetta Code: Catamorphism "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-24 15:27 +0000
  Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 12:43 -0700
    Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-25 09:53 +0000
      Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-25 06:41 -0700
        Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-25 16:06 -0500
          Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-25 20:40 -0700
            Rosetta Code ( was Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-29 12:06 +1000
              Re: Rosetta Code ( was Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-29 01:41 -0500
        Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-27 10:01 +0000
          Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 01:21 -0700
            Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 01:36 -0700
              Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Julian Fondren <ayrnieu@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 07:23 -0700
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-29 16:58 +0000
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism peter.m.falth@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 13:15 -0700
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-29 20:53 +0000
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism peter.m.falth@gmail.com - 2016-08-30 04:47 -0700
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-09-05 07:13 +0000
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-30 11:54 +1000
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-31 12:34 +1000
            Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-29 18:44 +1000
              Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-01 23:47 -0700
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-09-02 12:42 +0200
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-09-02 11:45 +0000
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-09-02 15:01 +0200
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-09-02 16:04 +0000
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-09-02 16:23 +0200
            Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Bruce Axtens <bruce.axtens@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 18:29 +0800
              Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 13:41 +0300
                Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism Bruce Axtens <bruce.axtens@gmail.com> - 2016-08-31 09:24 +0800
                Standard or Forth? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-09-01 13:45 +1000
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-02 21:54 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-04 07:35 +0100
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-04 00:41 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-09-04 02:55 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-04 13:26 +0100
                Re: Standard or Forth? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-09-04 13:59 +0000
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-04 23:09 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-09-05 09:55 +0300
                Re: Standard or Forth? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-05 08:39 +0100
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-04 01:25 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-04 14:13 +0100
                Re: Standard or Forth? Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-09-04 23:16 +0200
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-04 22:33 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-09-05 09:03 +0300
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-06 23:23 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-09-07 10:14 +0300
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-07 01:01 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-09-07 11:18 +0300
                Re: Standard or Forth? Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-09-07 08:47 -0500
                Re: Standard or Forth? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-05 09:20 +0100
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-05 02:21 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-09-05 08:10 +0000
                Re: Standard or Forth? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-05 10:51 +0100
                Re: Standard or Forth? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-03 08:05 +0200
                Re: Standard or Forth? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-09-03 03:00 -0500
                Re: Standard or Forth? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-09-03 22:48 +1000
                Re: Standard or Forth? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-09-03 15:05 +0100
                Re: Standard or Forth? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-09-03 07:46 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-03 23:53 +0200
                Re: Standard or Forth? stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-09-03 22:37 +0000
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-03 21:17 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-09-05 02:35 +1000
                Re: Standard or Forth? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-09-05 03:18 +0200
                Re: Standard or Forth? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-09-08 22:04 +1000
                Re: Standard or Forth? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-08 12:41 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-09-09 12:51 +1000
                Re: Standard or Forth? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-08 21:50 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-09-12 17:16 +1000
                Re: Standard or Forth? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-09-12 16:59 +0000
                Re: Standard or Forth? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-09-15 13:38 +1000
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-08 23:33 -0700
                Re: Standard or Forth? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-05 08:41 +0100
                Re: Standard or Forth? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-09-05 01:42 -0700
          Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-29 16:03 +0200
            Re: Rosetta Code: Catamorphism anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-29 16:04 +0000

csiph-web