Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: What's WRONG with Forth? Message-ID: <2780.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us> Date: 17 May 91 11:36:50 GMT Organization: (n.) to be organized. But that's not important right now. Lines: 39 Category 2, Topic 9 Message 100 Wed May 15, 1991 B.RODRIGUEZ2 [Brad] at 21:28 EDT To Bob Cavanaugh: I don't use C professionally, and the only PC C compiler I've used is Turbo C (basic package), so it's hard for me to judge. I also have difficulty distinguishing deficiencies in the language from deficiencies in one particular implementation. Certainly I consider Turbo C polished and well integrated. On the other hand, I've run into memory limits with some rather small C programs, so I probably wouldn't count on Turbo C for a large project. I assume your question was "why are professional _Forths_ 10X or more this price?" Easy. There's 100X or more customers for C. Software has a big "fixed cost" and a small "variable cost," so economies of scale really apply. To Dennis Ruffer: 1. For the command line parser, all we need is the text interpreter, but for field service, we really want to have the compiler as well. Why are colon and CREATE so sacred? 2. My clients do the maintenance. A shell and a good cookbook would probably do wonders. 3. If by "nucleus" you mean the source code for the underlying Forth system, no, we don't need it. The MPE compiler comes with complete source for the target compiler, which is loaded on top of a canned nucleus. So, we can modify the target compiler -- and we've had occasion to. Hope this helps. - Brad ----- This message came from GEnie via willett. You *cannot* reply to the author using e-mail. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.). Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp