Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!basser!softway!gary
From: gary@softway.oz (Gary Corby)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Declining Forth popularity.
Keywords: Forth, changes, extensions, marketing
Message-ID: <2470@softway.oz>
Date: 16 Dec 89 07:52:48 GMT
References: <1989Dec14.013516.24694@tree.uucp>
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd, Sydney, Australia
Lines: 49

stever@tree.uucp (Steve Rudek) writes:

>Suppose your life depended on getting Forth
>established as a (reasonably) popular language.  Further suppose that you
>had considerably programming and MARKETING resources.  What would you do?

I would die.

I can't imagine forth without reverse polish, and I can't
imagine a (reasonably) popular language that isn't
intuitive.  Reverse polish notation is anything but
intuitive.  Therefore I'm in trouble.

I feel very much as you do about forth and have had the same
experience trying to learn it thoroughly.  I keep thinking
this could be a great language but every time I try to do
something serious with it frustration eventually sets in.
This is normally due to the vast effort I have to go through
to do things which are built into other languages.  Example:
Formatted I/O.  Yes, it can be done, but why don't I get
standard libraries to do all the work for me?

The major advantages seem to me to be that it's a very fast
yet portable language.  Unfortunately those are also the 
marketing advantages of C.  Now I know a lot of forth
enthusiasts will point out lots of ways in which forth is
faster than C.  That's true.  But the difference isn't big
enough to overcome the fact that C has a more obvious syntax
for the average programmer.  Had the harware remained at the
same primitive level of 15 or 20 years ago I'm sure forth
would have prospered.  As it is if your C programs aren't
fast enough then you go down to the corner store and buy a
faster machine.

So to make it more acceptable to the world I think you need
the following:

1)	Standard libraries for various common functions.
2)	Removal of reverse polish syntax, but don't ask me how.
3)	A few successful public domain systems written in forth.
	This would force people to learn the language.
4)	Microsoft and IBM announce that their next offering will
	be implemented in forth.

Point 3 is the most accessible to the common forth enthusiast.
Has anyone, for example, written a news reader in forth?  How
about a TCP/IP implementation?  

Gary Corby