Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!news.cs.indiana.edu!purdue!bouma From: bouma@cs.purdue.EDU (William J. Bouma) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: What makes Forth Forth Message-ID: <12692@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> Date: 6 Dec 90 19:38:38 GMT References: <9012051459.AA18739@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University Lines: 28 In article <9012051459.AA18739@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Mitch Bradley writes: >> use it over and over again. extensibility without testability is insanity. >> Spell it `C' (sorry, Mitch: I realize that C is not untestable. It's just >> harder for me, and takes longer in general.) > >No argument from me. I too find Forth easier to test than C, and >prefer to program in Forth than in C. Isn't the main reason for this because FORTH is interactive and the C you are using is not? Interactive languages are always easier to debug and program. There are other interactive languages besides FORTH! >In promoting Forth, I find that a balanced viewpoint (C has these strengths >and these weaknesses, Forth has these strengths and these weaknesses) is >more effective overall than the extreme positions (C sucks; it is horrible. >Forth is God's gift to programmers) sometimes espoused by Forth fans. Definitely! "More effective" is exactly the way to put it. Whenever I encounter the extremist viewpoint from someone, their credibility goes way down. It says to me they both don't have much programming language experience, and they are prone to jump to conclusions. Why should I listen to anything such a person has to say? Why are these people not capable of saying, "FORTH is great", without including "C sucks" along with it? C may indeed suck, but try comparing FORTH to the myriads of other languages out there, including the other interactive ones. Then tell us what makes FORTH different. -- Bill