Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: ANS FORTH TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
Message-ID: <563.UUL1.3#5129@willett.UUCP>
Date: 26 Feb 90 23:17:33 GMT
Organization: Latest link in the ForthNet chain.  (Pgh, PA)
Lines: 20


 Date: 02-25-90 (22:23)              Number: 372 (Echo)
   To: L.ZETTEL                      Refer#: 371
 From: DARRYL BIECH                    Read: NO
 Subj: *MESS*                        Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE

 Being a novice with FORTH, but involved with other languages as well, it
 sounds like history repeating itself. Problems of group dynamics, and of
 fears that an implementation may be left behind etc., or that the
 standard will be too big. Having to support both Intel and Motorola
 based architectures, and yet maintain performance and a high degree of
 compatibility are difficult items for a small group to address let alone
 a committee. If all the standard does is provide a good small core that
 encourages increased commercial involvement, the language will benefit.
                                                   -d.b.

 NET/Mail : British Columbia Forth Board - Burnaby BC - (604)434-5886   
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process.
Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'