Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!alberta!mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA!Bill_Burris
From: userENY7@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Bill Burris)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: What's WRONG with Forth?
Message-ID: <2040@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA>
Date: 3 Jan 91 18:01:06 GMT
Organization: MTS Univ of Alberta
Lines: 22

The problems with FORTH as I see it:
 
There are not enough users of FORTH.
None of the machines we buy are shipped with FORTH.
Managememt and the people with the money are not intrested in leaving
the beaten path.
Most projects here are one of a kind.  The prototype is used to do the job
until it is no longer needed.  This makes it diffecult to try new ways
of doing things.
The FORTH I have used on my Apple, uses screens instead of regular files.
This is one of the feathers of FORTH which should be forgoten.
If FORTH becomes as popular as C, with a standard implementation, I will
be able to justify spending other peoples money on it.
For now I will do my work on the NeXT using Objective C, C++, C, and 56001
assembly unless I can get a version of FORTH which works well with
NeXTStep and the DSP.  This FORTH must be compatiable with Mach and be able
to call code written in the other languages and be called by the other
languages.  This FORTH implementation needs to be cheap enough that I could
purchace it myself and I would have to learn to used it on my own time.  If
FORTH becomes as widely used as other languages then I would be able to
spend several hundred dollars of other peoples money to purchace the
package and learn to use it during office hours.