Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!jarthur!petunia!polyslo!jdudeck
From: jdudeck@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (John R. Dudeck)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: function calls (long)
Message-ID: <26086eb6.4cc6@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>
Date: 22 Mar 90 06:20:38 GMT
References: <584@bsovax.UUCP> <5200053@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: jdudeck@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (John R. Dudeck)
Organization: Cal Poly State University -- San Luis Obispo
Lines: 12


In article <5200053@m.cs.uiuc.edu> robison@m.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>I remember a strong similarity between the early Burroughs stack
>machines and the early versions of FORTH.  Can anyone comment on whether
>FORTH was inspired by the Burroughs stack machines?

I took a course in Forth from polyForth back in 1981.  We were given a
dose of the history of Forth and even graced by a visit from Charlie Moore,
its creator.  The first incarnation of Forth was done on a PDP11 with 4k
of core memory.  I belive the main considerations were 1. compactness of
code (hence threaded implementation) and 2. simplicity of compilation
(hence reverse polish notation and stacks).

-- 
John Dudeck                           "You want to read the code closely..." 
jdudeck@Polyslo.CalPoly.Edu             -- C. Staley, in OS course, teaching 
ESL: 62013975 Tel: 805-545-9549          Tanenbaum's MINIX operating system.