Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!seismo!lll-crg!styx!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!jade!eris!mwm
From: mwm@eris.berkeley.edu (Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: RRe: What's so good about FORTH?
Message-ID: <893@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Fri, 20-Jun-86 21:38:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: jade.893
Posted: Fri Jun 20 21:38:31 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Jun-86 13:23:24 EDT
References: <201@pyuxv.UUCP> <3700003@uiucdcsp> <132@vaxb.calgary.UUCP> <813@jplgodo.UUCP> <679@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU>
Sender: usenet@jade.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mwm@eris.UUCP (Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer)
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
Lines: 15
Keywords: FORTH, threaded-code

In article <679@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU> faustus@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher) writes:
>Maybe I'm not seeing the point about "threaded" languages -- you don't see
>C programmers claiming that the major advantage of C is that you can use
>function calls to build up higher-level routines out of lower ones...  Or is
>it just that since forth is the first language many micro users use after
>basic and asm, functions (or "words") seem like a really big thing...
>
>	Wayne

The advantage that Forth offers over C is that the programmer-defined
words look like the built-in words, and can replace them.

LISP offers the same advantage, and is more readable, to boot.

	<mike