Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!rutgers!rochester!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!ee.rochester.edu!rochgte!f201.n260.z1.FIDONET.ORG!John.Passaniti
From: John.Passaniti@f201.n260.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Passaniti)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: would it still be Forth? (A thought experiment)
Message-ID: <43.2701A4D8@rochgte.FIDONET.ORG>
Date: 27 Sep 90 05:19:55 GMT
Sender: ufgate@rochgte.FIDONET.ORG (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:260/201 - Age Of Chance, Rochester NY
Lines: 23


 > From: rob@idacom.uucp (Rob Chapman)

     [Idea of grafting a transparent FORTH interpreter as a shell to MS-DOS]

 >  Q. to DOS programmers: Is this possible?
 >  Q. to UNIX programmers: Is this possible?

     Not only possible, but a damn good idea.  Surely, it 
would not be a shell for everyone, but for FORTH fiends, I 
think it would be ideal.

     In fact, I imagine that it could be added (fairly 
easily) to existing FORTH systems by rewriting the 
interpreter.


--  
*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*
John Passaniti - via FidoNet node 1:260/230
UUCP: ...!rochester!ur-valhalla!rochgte!201!John.Passaniti
INTERNET: John.Passaniti@f201.n260.z1.FIDONET.ORG
*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*