Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site entropy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!hplabs!tektronix!uw-beaver!uw-june!entropy!fetrow
From: fetrow@entropy.UUCP (David Fetrow)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.lang.forth
Subject: Re: FORTH, the heat is on
Message-ID: <241@entropy.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 11-Jan-86 00:55:45 EST
Article-I.D.: entropy.241
Posted: Sat Jan 11 00:55:45 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 14-Jan-86 04:26:53 EST
References: <1191@princeton.UUCP> <681@pucc-j> <444@tekchips.UUCP> <703@pucc-j>
Distribution: net
Organization: UW MathStat, Seattle
Lines: 14
Keywords: ENOUGH
Xref: watmath net.micro:13472 net.lang.forth:344
Summary: Info content going down


 At this point the debate seems to be getting nasty. FORTH is certainly
interesting (whether it's "failed" or not) and FIG will GIVE away an
implementation. Whether it's worth using is a matter of taste and application.
If it's useful it's very easy to find out, if it's lousy it's also easy to
find out: try it (on something non-critical).
 If nothing else it's an interesting experience, as evidenced by this debate.

-- 
 
  -"Daphnia Dave" Fetrow

{ ihnp4, fluke, tektronix, uw-june }!uw-beaver!entropy!fetrow :UUCP
  entropy!fetrow@uw-june.arpa                                 :ARPA