Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!willett!files
From: files@willett.UUCP (Mailed File Repository)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Category 2,  Topic 11
Message-ID: <37.UUL1.3#5129@willett.UUCP>
Date: 20 Dec 89 06:00:39 GMT
Organization: Latest Link in ForthNet Chain
Lines: 35

Message 21        Tue Dec 19, 1989
W.BADEN1 [Wil]               at 21:36 PST
 
> "It is no longer the purpose of programs to instruct our machines, it > is
the purpose of machines to execute our programs".  Edsger W. Dijkstra. > ....
Computing has gone far since [1980].  Forth hasn't.

I am in sympathy with the sentiments expressed by the writer. (He works at the
place where I do most of my consulting.) 

The line between "Programs that Instruct machines" and "Machines that Execute
programs" is arbitrary, and every programming language must accommodate both
objectives.  Forth leans toward the former.  I do not criticize Forth for this
-- that's what Forth is for.

Forth will always have a place in embedded systems, and I think it has a
bright future in Forth engines.

I am not engaged with either of these specialties.  This is from lack of
opportunity, not lack of interest.

When I first became involved with Forth, I had 64K of memory, two 140K floppy
drives, and a text-only Epson printer.  In total this cost about $2400. 
(Think what you can do for half of that today.)  Now I have 4 megabytes of
memory, two 800K floppy drives, a 60 megabyte harddisk, and an Imagewriter. 
This cost less than $2800.

Forth's greatest power is its Productivity.  With my early system Forth was
the best way to acquire productivity.  With my present system there are other
easier-to-use, easier-to-learn, and more powerful ways to achieve
productivity.

Procedamus in pace.  Wil.

 ------------