Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #28616
| Date | 2014-02-20 09:37 -1000 |
|---|---|
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
| Organization | FORTH, Inc. |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: Forth reinvention |
| References | <b5ec955a-146f-41ea-a227-22e4224cab49@googlegroups.com> |
| Message-ID | <o7KdncO2m9MJxJvOnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@supernews.com> (permalink) |
On 2/19/14 11:19 PM, dambere@web.de wrote: > With regard to the discussion in 'Forth in oblivion', I have specifically asked the question what properties a Forth successor should have ? > > I think important are the following aspects: > > - switch to infix notation: > Personally I found RPN an elegant, mathematical notation both solving inconsistencies of traditional infix notations and ease parsing. However, in general people have an innate aversion to the adoption of unorthodox concepts nor are people able to think in abstract terms of implementation efficiency. For these psychological reasons, a RPN based programming language can hardly interest a wider audience without constraint, especially since most programmers these days are already grown with quite different (and much more complex) languages compared to Forth. RPN is way overstated as an impediment to Forth, because it's an obvious feature that's easy to point to. But I really don't think it's a serious impediment. Many, many people in addition to you have learned to manage *postfix* notation and found it elegant and efficient. As Hans so succinctly said, stacks are used in many compilers. By exposing them (and other internal features) Forth puts more power in the hands of programmers. That's a good thing. > - Automatic parallelization: > The trend goes to multi core architectures. A programming language that is relieving the programmer from the not inconsiderable task of paralleling programs will necessarily be attractive. Parallelization is an implementation strategy, not a language feature. > - Lack of leadership: > To my knowledge, there exist no central leadership with financial impact to promote Forth by all means. This must change. > Now you're close to the mark. The reason that Forth hasn't received more notice in the world is largely due to the fact that none of its developers or supporters has had the financial or institutional backing necessary to publicize it widely or give it the public visibility needed to generate a following. FORTH, Inc. FIG, MPE, and others have tried, but without way more significant budgets small businesses or interest groups have no leverage. How many of you who are using Forth in professional projects are reporting on your work in journals, magazines, or general computing conferences? If you don't do this, how is anyone to know? Did the Forth 200x group send press releases regarding the Forth2012 public review? Did they follow up with prominent magazines or web sites to ensure the notice was published? The fact is, Forth has undergone a constant process of reinvention ever since Chuck's first publications in the 70's. Major improvements have been made in features (multitasking, data base support, graphics) by vendors, and Forth94 generated immense breakthroughs in implementation strategies such as sophisticated cross-compilers and optimizing compilers. The innovations have been undertaken primarily by people who are *using* the language in real-world applications, and therefore respond to actual programmer needs, rather than perceptions. 21st C Forth is a far better language than it was in the 80's or 90's. 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." ==================================================
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 01:19 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-20 05:07 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-20 14:56 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-20 16:16 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-20 23:25 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-20 20:42 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 12:41 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-02-20 11:18 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 02:36 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-02-20 17:35 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 11:34 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-20 09:53 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-20 12:23 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 14:00 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-20 14:23 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-22 02:21 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2014-02-22 12:02 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-21 04:38 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-02-20 12:35 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-20 13:38 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-02-20 03:59 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-20 15:11 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-02-20 07:41 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Richard Owlett <rowlett@pcnetinc.com> - 2014-02-20 06:38 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 12:03 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-02-20 07:08 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-20 09:37 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-20 20:50 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-20 15:39 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-21 10:50 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-02-21 11:10 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 13:50 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-21 05:46 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 12:55 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-21 15:11 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-22 09:23 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 12:38 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-22 13:29 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-22 07:52 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-22 19:06 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-23 13:40 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-20 20:40 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-20 18:43 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-02-21 13:16 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-02-21 10:49 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-21 14:50 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 16:28 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-22 12:54 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-22 10:27 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-22 17:49 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-21 20:51 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-22 09:39 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 02:40 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 19:24 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 22:48 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-23 04:39 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 22:46 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 14:26 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-24 02:44 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Spam@ControlQ.com - 2014-03-03 12:43 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-03 10:06 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-24 03:59 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention mike73900@gmail.com - 2014-03-03 14:04 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention mhx@iae.nl - 2014-03-05 06:59 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2014-03-05 16:33 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-03-05 09:08 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention mhx@iae.nl - 2014-03-05 10:47 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2014-03-07 07:30 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-03-07 07:55 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-07 09:29 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2014-03-07 12:04 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-03-07 17:03 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-03-08 05:31 -0800
csiph-web