Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!purdue!bouma From: bouma@cs.purdue.EDU (William J. Bouma) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Re: Real programmers Keywords: forth, lisp Message-ID: <7141@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> Date: 17 Jul 89 21:35:50 GMT References: <8907171553.AA17414@lilac.berkeley.edu> <7135@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <30044@cornell.UUCP> Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University Lines: 19 In article <30044@cornell.UUCP> travis@svax.cs.cornell.edu (Gregory Michael Travis) writes: >In article <7135@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> bouma@cs.purdue.EDU (William J. Bouma) writes: >$ lisp and lisp can be written in forth. Big deal! > >Big Deal? Do you know how elegantly it can be done? Does that matter? Sure >it does. abstract languages like lisp, and forth (sort of) are amazingly >expressive, and it is no useless fact that they can implement one another. > Of course it is a beatiful thing that such can be done. It is just that everyone has known this for a long time. SO why have there been 5 posts simply stating that fact? I would love to see some posts talking about how this can elegantly be done. Tell me how the architecture of the Novix chip allows one to efficiently implement lisp. That may make for some interesting reading. But do not tell me that it can be done, for that is common knowledge, and thus, no big deal! -- Bill || ...!purdue!bouma