Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!nbires!stcvax!dlb
From: dlb@stcvax.UUCP (David Black)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Forth
Message-ID: <301@stcvax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 21-Oct-87 14:28:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: stcvax.301
Posted: Wed Oct 21 14:28:30 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Oct-87 07:52:57 EDT
References: <5.21698D15@circle.UUCP> <301@larry.UUCP>
Sender: news@stcvax.UUCP
Organization: Storage Technology Corp.  Louisville, CO
Lines: 24
Summary: using forth and C


Storage Tech makes IBM compatible disk and tape drives.
The test equipment development group that I work for
uses forth in the engineering equipment that we develop
to support rapid prototyping in the design phase but
uses C for the manufacturing equipment.

We have found forth useful for "quick and dirty," engineering
development where we want to rapidly test a number of ideas.
It also seems to provide a good way to get people who don't
want to learn C to write their own programs,
but it doesn't seem to fit in well enough with the rest of
the applications in a UNIX-based manufacturing support
environment.  Our opinions may change as we get more
experience.

What have been people's experiences with forth in a
"production environment"?  (whatever that may mean to you.)
Are the advantages we see advantages of forth or advantages
that we would see with any interactive language?
-- 
	  David Black
          Storage Technology (Disk Division), Louisville, CO.
		{ucbvax!nbires | ihnp4 | hao} !stcvax!dlb