Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!purdue!bouma From: bouma@cs.purdue.EDU (William J. Bouma) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Forth and CS Message-ID: <13640@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> Date: 1 Mar 91 22:08:23 GMT References: <9103011826.AA19197@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University Lines: 23 In article <9103011826.AA19197@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Mitch Bradley writes: >The thing that Forth taught me about Computer Science is that syntax >is a waste of time. Not only is syntax a waste of time, in lots of >cases it is harmful, because it boxes you in and prevents you from >doing something next year. What a lame thing to say! (esp. comming from someone who I agree with 98% of the time) Syntax is a major conveyor of meaning. How could anything be communicated (esp. programs) without syntax? Forth may have flexible syntax, but it definitely has syntax. Perhaps you meant that Forth teaches that syntax should be driven by semantics rather than the other way around? That I could partially agree with. But "syntax is a waste of time" is like saying that information in general is worthless. >Some Forth programmers have argued that most of CS is a waste of time. >I do not concur. If this newsgroup be any indication, many Forth programmers know even less about CS than they do about programming. -- Bill