Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!purdue!haven!mimsy!nocusuhs!yoshi
From: yoshi@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (Dojun Yoshikami)
Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Subject: Re: "Easy" way to put "AI" in realtime embedded systems?
Message-ID: <1991Apr19.130808.7613@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil>
Date: 19 Apr 91 13:08:08 GMT
References: <1991Apr16.155126.5186@sagpd1> <1991Apr17.143949.25843@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil> <1991Apr17.193144.15194@sctc.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: National Naval Medical Center
Lines: 53

In article <1991Apr17.193144.15194@sctc.com> smith@sctc.com (Rick Smith) writes:
>>>
>>>    I may be totally wrong in this but aren't FORTH and LISP close relatives?
>>>It seems to me that FORTH was the foundation of LISP. ...
>>>Is there anyone out there that can set me straight or re-enforce this??
>
>John McCarthy developed LISP around 1956-57 and presented it as a
>notation for fiddling with recursive functions on a computer.
>
>Chuck Moore developed FORTH about 10 years later. I forget just why
>did it, but Kitt's Peak Observatory was an early and ardent user.

He most certainly did.  Forth has quite a few LISP'isms in it.  Some words such
as tick (') came from LISP, even though they work a bit differently in FORTH.

>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>Monty Saine
>
>And yoshi@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (Dojun Yoshikami) writes:
>
[lots of stuff deleted.  Hey, I should have put my flame suit on..]

I forgot one of the biggest differences.  With FORTH you don't have all those
stupid parentheses.  (You do, however, run the risk of killing yourself when
you underflow the stack!)

Unlike what you said about doing things in a weekend in Forth, many people have
disobeyed that rule, to the common good of all involved, as FORTH has been
successfully used in many LARGE systems, and continues to be used in large
systems.  One such large system controls an entire airport (It's described in 
JFAR, some time long ago), and another, an entire sonar training simulator which
had stations for a trainer and a whole bunch of students.  Both projects
took more than a weekend. However, FORTH is NOT ALWAYS good for a LOT of large 
systems.  Forth's failings with large systems generally stem from lacking all 
those things you find in Ada (No flames, please) that keep programmers from 
stepping on each other, and all those things you find in OS's that allow users 
to share data (sharing forth dictionaries can be problematic when security is 
involved).  But that's not what Forth was designed for.  I agree, Forth seems
to appear to run best on small microcomputer systems. But you can get PolyForth
for the VAX, though, and that is what is usually referred to as a Large
Mini (discounting micro-VAXen).

Anyways, enough of this.  We'll get nowhere yelling any more about what one 
language does and what it doesn't.  Let's get back to the robotics instead, 
the REAL reason for this newsgroup. 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
D M Yoshikami  :-) ;-) :-) | Internet: yoshikami@usuhsb.ucc.usuhs.nnmc.navy.mil
May the Forth be with you! | Bitnet  : yoshikami@usuhsb.bitnet
***  !!xob X*NU V METSYS T&TA eht ni renosirp dleh gnieb m`I  !pleH  !pleH  ***
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=