http://yosefk.com/blog/my-history-with-forth-stack-machines.htmlNice :-)
http://yosefk.com/blog/my-history-with-forth-stack-machines.html
On Sun, 10 Sep 2023 05:04:57 -0700 (PDT)
Zbig <zbigni...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://yosefk.com/blog/my-history-with-forth-stack-machines.html
I went to the link and the first thing which caught my attention was
that the page has 44498 lines ! "Wow , this is a very popular blog"
I thought. But it turns out that about 4400 lines is relevant content
and the rest is spam. Really , people should keep a closer look on
their blogs.
http://yosefk.com/blog/my-history-with-forth-stack-machines.html
What caught my eye was his description of Moore in action and his
conclusion:
"This is Forth. Seriously. Forth is _not_ the language."
What caught my eye was his description of Moore in action and his conclusion:
"This is Forth. Seriously. Forth is _not_ the language."To be precise: the descriptions are quotes from Jeff Fox' articles.
What caught my eye was his description of Moore in action and his
conclusion:
"This is Forth. Seriously. Forth is _not_ the language."
To be precise: the descriptions are quotes from Jeff Fox' articles.
What caught my eye was his description of Moore in action and his
conclusion:
"This is Forth. Seriously. Forth is _not_ the language."
To be precise: the descriptions are quotes from Jeff Fox' articles.The comment was the blogger's. His source may have been second-hand
but even after factoring in reporter bias and spin, none of Fox'
statements attributed to Moore struck me as being 'beyond belief'.
I feel more uncomfortable when folks tell me Forth is too complicated
and in need of help which only they can provide.
The comment was the blogger's. His source may have been second-handWhat caught my eye was his description of Moore in action and his
conclusion:
"This is Forth. Seriously. Forth is _not_ the language."
To be precise: the descriptions are quotes from Jeff Fox' articles.
but even after factoring in reporter bias and spin, none of Fox'
statements attributed to Moore struck me as being 'beyond belief'.
In most cases he's quoting Jeff each time when talking about Moore:
„Here's what Jeff Fox, a prominent member of the Forth community who've
worked with Chuck Moore for years, has to say…" (quote), or „One reason
not to use locals is that Chuck Moore hates them:” (and then quote),
„In his chip design tools, Chuck Moore naturally did not use the standard
equations:” (followed by another quote from Jeff's page) etc.
But yes, I agree, his personal words also can be found, like e.g. „Chuck Moore
constantly tweaks the language and largely dismisses the ANS standard as rooted in the past and bloated.”
I feel more uncomfortable when folks tell me Forth is too complicated
and in need of help which only they can provide.
My guess is Forth offers to many… too much freedom! Most people like to have some constrains, they feel more comfortable having some signposts.
For example: ARM assembly allows for one's own „configuration” of the
CPU to one's liking, I mean there's complete freedom which register shall
be used for which purpose. Guess what? They immediately invented ABI,
stating that „R13 should be used for stack pointer, R15 for program counter”
etc. It's all described in details and even already implemented in (dis)assemblers
and debuggers — that purely „conventional” layout.
Forth probably is perceived as „anarchic”.
My guess is Forth offers to many… too much freedom! Most people like to have some constrains, they feel more comfortable having some signposts.
Is Forth a matter of acceptance? Moore could have been Forth's authority but he seems to have rejected the role.
"I am not in the business of promoting Forth. I am not promoting what I am doing here. I am just reporting it."
For example: ARM assembly allows for one's own „configuration” of the CPU to one's liking, I mean there's complete freedom which register shall be used for which purpose. Guess what? They immediately invented ABI, stating that „R13 should be used for stack pointer, R15 for program counter”
etc. It's all described in details and even already implemented in (dis)assemblers
and debuggers — that purely „conventional” layout.
Forth probably is perceived as „anarchic”.
I can imagine. Moore offers no safe haven in which one can become complacent - a tradition that goes back to Diogenes. Is Forth a philosophy? Moore asked the question in his first widely reported speech. If it is, he appears to have
stayed the course and ignored the signposts.
...
That „particular way” in programming area took the form of Forth programming
language but note, that the more general rules can be applied to variety of domains,
it's not limited to programming.
On 13/09/2023 7:10 pm, Zbig wrote:
'Don't make things more complicated than they need to be' is a good rule.
On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 5:35:40 AM UTC+2, dxf wrote:
On 13/09/2023 7:10 pm, Zbig wrote:
'Don't make things more complicated than they need to be' is a good rule.
The problem is, once the customer has what h/she wants, the next question >will be for an upgrade that re-introduces all the stuff that was dropped >previously, and maybe even more.
-marcel
In article <47fe1287-b286-43ea...@googlegroups.com>,[..]
Marcel Hendrix <m...@iae.nl> wrote:
The problem is, once the customer has what h/she wants, the next question >will be for an upgrade that re-introduces all the stuff that was dropped >previously, and maybe even more.More like: using a working program customers finally understand what
he really wants.
On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 5:35:40 AM UTC+2, dxf wrote:'The customer made me do it' doesn't look good on a CV.
On 13/09/2023 7:10 pm, Zbig wrote:
'Don't make things more complicated than they need to be' is a good rule.
The problem is, once the customer has what h/she wants, the next question will be for an upgrade that re-introduces all the stuff that was dropped previously, and maybe even more.
In article <47fe1287-b286-43ea-8954-dfb94af70f64n@googlegroups.com>,
Marcel Hendrix <mhx@iae.nl> wrote:
On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 5:35:40 AM UTC+2, dxf wrote:
On 13/09/2023 7:10 pm, Zbig wrote:The problem is, once the customer has what h/she wants, the next question
'Don't make things more complicated than they need to be' is a good rule. >>
will be for an upgrade that re-introduces all the stuff that was dropped
previously, and maybe even more.
More like: using a working program customers finally understand what
he really wants.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 475 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 18:24:04 |
| Calls: | 9,487 |
| Calls today: | 6 |
| Files: | 13,617 |
| Messages: | 6,121,091 |