5 ms·
Why hasn't someone made a Go and Forth combination yet?
by oneplane 8y ago
Why hasn't someone made a Go and Forth combination yet?
- fouc 8y agoWhat makes you think Go and Forth go well together?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- kstrauser 8y agoEveryone knows you Go Forth and multiply.
- MaxBarraclough 8y agoStrictly speaking, you're meant to GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY.
- WrtCdEvrydy 8y agoForthGo? Sounds like it isn't that good if it took them four tries.
- c3534l 8y agoI've always thought Haskell and Forth would make an amazing combo.
- rfnash 8y agoThat's more or less what kitten[1] is. [1] http://kittenlang.org/ http://kittenlang.org/
- stevekemp 8y agoI've implemented forth a few times, most recently in perl. I have a couple of forth-implementations in golang bookmarked. As a quick example take this one: $ go get github.com/unixdj/forego $ echo '3 4 + dup * . ' | forego 2>/dev/null 49 ok
- oneplane 8y agomaybe it's just me, but that seems really neat
- Marazan 8y agoThis is not getting enough up votes.
- yiyus 8y agoI made it in 2010: https://bitbucket.org/yiyus/ngaro/src https://bitbucket.org/yiyus/ngaro/src As I said in another comment, it won't work now because Go had not yet reached 1.0 at that time, but it should be easy to get it working again.
- boomlinde 8y agoNot exactly Forth, but I implemented a small branchless Forth-like language in Go for audio synthesis and music: https://github.com/boomlinde/acidforth https://github.com/boomlinde/acidforth I think entirely procedural languages are a nice fit for this domain since they make order of operations apparent. Going for something Forth-like was obvious, since it's terse, trivial to implement and makes factoring easy. That said, I think the documentation of this project is a bit out of date, that the overall architecture is flawed and that stack juggling can be a bit distracting when working with more complex algorithms. I intend to rewrite it some day.