Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!saturn!xanthian From: xanthian@saturn.ADS.COM (Metafont Consultant Account) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Thoughts on Forth Message-ID: <10527@saturn.ADS.COM> Date: 20 Jan 90 00:57:16 GMT References: <9001191304.AA23264@jade.berkeley.edu> Organization: Advanced Decision Systems, Mt. View, CA (415) 960-7300 Lines: 99 In article <9001191304.AA23264@jade.berkeley.edu> Forth Interest Group International List writes: kent> say that I would be unwilling to start a graphics project on any kent> workstation platform after 1992 using any language that did not kent> include a binding to X Windows. My reason? Almost every job ad kent> in misc.jobs.offered that mentions graphics _requires_ X Windows kent> experience. mitch> Several points: mitch> 1. So far, Forth hasn't made many inroads into the workstation mitch> market. I doubt that it ever will. (My own work is in some mitch> sense an exception; Forth may become popular as the boot mitch> firmware for workstations. However, that has little to do mitch> with discussions of window system bindings.) If true, this is rather a pity. I have seen some immense projects done in Forth, including an entire cartographic data capture, database, editing, application, and drafting package. Such projects are of the evolutionary development type so suitable to Forth, and are of the sort that make use of high end displays and workstations. mitch> 2. Even if X is ubiquitous in the workstation market, that mitch> doesn't necessarily mean that it has much, if any, impact in mitch> the Mac or PC markets. I disagree. First, because I have a firm belief in juggernauts, second, because X is already available for my Amiga, and if the larger 386 and Mac markets don't have it now they soon will. The interfaces being built on X allow mixed vendor shops to have common equipment human interfaces, with the concommitent training savings and productivity advantages well know from other areas overtaken by defacto standards. The interface deficits of the PC world have held folks back for far too long, and the Mac is one of the reasons managers now come to expect a better interface. mitch> 3. There are many competing toolkits and "look and feel" mitch> guidelines on top of X. Just having the binding to the mitch> underlying window mechanism isn't enough. Agreed, but it is a beginning, and the discussion grows more complex as Open Look, Motif, etc. are brought into the picture. kent> five times the price most potential purchasers are willing to pay. kent> A direct effect is that the standards are slow to be adopted, and kent> that the "big folks" get a big head start on using them. Since kent> these prices also apply to the (photocopied) draft standards, mitch> The price for the ANSI Forth draft standards aren't inflated. mitch> The X3J14 committee sells the draft standards for $10 a pop, mitch> which is almost exactly what it costs to photocopy and bind them mitch> (figure 3 cents a page x 150 pages + 1.50 for the binding + the mitch> time it takes the secretary to go to the copy shop and fill out mitch> the address label, etc.). You lucked out. The FORTRAN committee, I understand, was compelled by ANSI to distribute dpANS's via ANSI's outlet, with prices $70 and up. Now if only you can get the eventual Forth ANS released at a reasonable price. mitch> You can't participate in the standards effort for free, but in mitch> the case of the ANSI Forth effort, every attempt has been made mitch> to minimize the cost. Participation by mail (buying draft mitch> standards and submitting proposals) costs 10 or 20 dollars, and mitch> going to meetings can be done for a few hundred dollars. mitch> Meetings alternate between the east coast and the west coast mitch> (where Forth programmers tend to be concentrated). If a meeting mitch> is held withing driving distance of you, you can attend that mitch> meeting for free (this is not an unlikely think; they really are mitch> scattered around pretty well). It will cost me about $200 to mitch> attend next week's meeting; I got a cheap plane ticket to San mitch> Diego, and I'm sharing a hotel room with another committee mitch> member. So, you could reasonably expect to be able to attend mitch> every other meeting for about $600 a year, a far cry from $20K. My costing of this was based on my 4.5 years participation in ANSI X3H3 (Computer Graphics Programming Languages). It included 15% of my workday when away from meetings (untold unpaid overtime in addition), and three one week meetings per year with travel, lodging, and meals expenses. It was every bit of $20K per year, and I am greatful to the government agency and later the corporation who sponsored me to the committee for all those years. (I may have been a bit enthusiastic as a participant, I was a subcommittee secretary for three of those years, which added a lot of unaudited photocopy and mailing expenses to the other costs.) I don't especially mean to disagree heatedly with you in all this, Mitch. Different committee styles allow different costs for participation, and what the future actually brings in workstations and interfaces will be seen in the course of time. I surely have no crystal ball available. -- Again, my opinions, not the account furnishers'. xanthian@well.sf.ca.us xanthian@ads.com (Kent Paul Dolan) Kent, the (bionic) man from xanth, now available as a build-a-xanthian kit at better toy stores near you. Warning - some parts proven fragile. -> METAFONT, TeX, graphics programming done on spec -- (415) 964-4486 <-