Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!spool2.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!jarthur!ucivax!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucsd!sdcc6!ir230
From: ir230@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (john wavrik)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: ANS Forth Trial Run (was Re: The real question)
Summary: Don't buy before you try
Message-ID: <15875@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Date: 22 Jan 91 07:37:51 GMT
References: <4489@mindlink.UUCP> <15788@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> <11618@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Lines: 58



Phil Koopman writes,

> Maybe I am wrong, but here is what I am assuming will happen:
> The "proposed standard" (dpANS? I don't remember the acronym)
> will be released for review by the community.  Farsighted
> vendors who want to ensure they have a future will immediately
> release Forth systems that conform (it should be easy, since
> the standard is probably changing less with each revision now).
> Then, people in the Forth community who are worried about being
> "stuck" will use those compilers for their next big piece of
> code.  If it doesn't work, they'll scream loud and long.
> If it does work, they have a leg up on using the new standard
> Forth for all their future projects.

No, Phil, you're not wrong UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

The situation here is very like what happens when you commission 
someone to build a house for you. There is a critical point when the 
builder declares himself done. At that point, you must agree that, in 
principle, the builder has accomplished what he has been asked to do.
After that, you can ask him to retouch some paint -- but if the 
builder hasn't put in a bathroom, you must reject the entire house. 

Under normal circumstances the builder does something expected and 
produces something you have every right to expect is what you want.
Suppose, however, you have a builder who periodically reports that he 
has had to change the design because of conflicts between the plumber 
and carpenter? Suppose, on one of your close inspections, you found 
that the hot and cold water taps were reversed -- and that there were 
no electrical outlets in the kitchen? 

The builder has not done what he was expected to do, by his own 
admission. Whether he has, in principle, accomplished what he was 
asked to do is unclear (he has, in fact, produced a different house). 
You have one of three choices: 

     1.  Reject the house because it is being built in a
         manner that is unlikely to produce satisfactory results.
  
     2.  Try to be charitable to the builder -- and ask that he
         allow a more extended inspection period than usual
         (and be willing to fix more deep-seated defects).

     3.  Blindly accept the house entirely on the builder's
         assurance.

My personal opinion:  I think that Forth needs a good Standard
but that the worst thing that can happen to Forth is yet another
devisive Standard.

P.S. I can tell you right now: the house has no bathrooms!

                                                  John J Wavrik 
             jjwavrik@ucsd.edu                    Dept of Math  C-012 
                                                  Univ of Calif - San Diego 
                                                  La Jolla, CA  92093