3 ms·

I have known an embedded engineer for probably a decade now. He uses Forth. I watched him write a tiny forth kernel in a Kb of RAM or so, then run a dictionar

I have known an embedded engineer for probably a decade now. He uses Forth. I watched him write a tiny forth kernel in a Kb of RAM or so, then run a dictionary through it to get a brand new CPU bootstrapped in what could be as little as a day. Very impressive. That system got an assembler / disassembler used to make new system words and other words fast. Modifying a Forth system, and I say that due to how Forth is really an environment that becomes capable of the application, depends lot on who made it and what one can know of their thought process. What I thought interesting about this guys approach us a fairly pure Forth is used to bootstrap. Then one that is a lot more comfy gets made for the longer get term. Once that stage is reached, and there are good tools, assembler / disassembler, monitor, word viewer, etc... Forth can be made less of a puzzle. One can even add other syntax, an interpreter, if desired. The product is more like a dev system, self hosted and capable. I find it all compelling, but as you say, much different.

kjs3 7y ago
To be fair, that's kinda the use case for Forth in the modern world: embedded development, single, capable developer, bootstrap something minimalist up and get it stable, create a DSL to solve the problem.
- brudgers 7y ago
  Seems like a worthwhile enough capability to make Forth worth learning.
  - ddingus 7y ago
    Absolutely. I think it is. And have been taking those steps myself. It works how getting Linux onto something does. The benefit is much smaller initial resource footprint.
dwheeler 7y ago
That's a plausible use case. Question is, if the engineer goes away, how long would it take to replace him? Languages do not take too long to learn, but Forth programs are often hard for others to read. I think most people prefer cross-compilation on small systems for professional use. If you are doing it as a hobby, ignore everything I just daid. I see the fun in it, and applaud it. Enjoy!
- ddingus 7y ago
  Again, depends on how the Forth is done. Counter question: Given the obvious savings, why not invest some of that into a second person to retain a clear advantage? Do what most people prefer and get results that most people get. There are other ways to success.
  - dwheeler 7y ago
    > There are other ways to success. Absolutely. I've played with Forth many times, and enjoyed it. But when it comes to building systems that people pay to develop & maintain, I haven't found any use cases recently. No doubt there are some, but I suspect they're much less justifiable today.
    - ddingus 7y ago
      Putting pay under emphasis does not add any value to your earlier comment. It's a big world out there. Guess I shall reply with same.
    - ddingus 7y ago
      Let me expand a bit. Was tired when I wrote the snarky comment. In a typical corporate environment, yes. Your thoughts ring true. It is a big world outside that scene, and many playing there can benefit from Forth. That is the utility. People who grok Forth flat out solve hard problems like no other. Tool for that toolbox, essentially.

kjs3 7y ago

To be fair, that's kinda the use case for Forth in the modern world: embedded development, single, capable developer, bootstrap something minimalist up and get it stable, create a DSL to solve the problem.

brudgers 7y ago
Seems like a worthwhile enough capability to make Forth worth learning.
- ddingus 7y ago
  Absolutely. I think it is. And have been taking those steps myself. It works how getting Linux onto something does. The benefit is much smaller initial resource footprint.

dwheeler 7y ago

That's a plausible use case. Question is, if the engineer goes away, how long would it take to replace him? Languages do not take too long to learn, but Forth programs are often hard for others to read. I think most people prefer cross-compilation on small systems for professional use. If you are doing it as a hobby, ignore everything I just daid. I see the fun in it, and applaud it. Enjoy!

ddingus 7y ago
Again, depends on how the Forth is done. Counter question: Given the obvious savings, why not invest some of that into a second person to retain a clear advantage? Do what most people prefer and get results that most people get. There are other ways to success.
- dwheeler 7y ago
  > There are other ways to success. Absolutely. I've played with Forth many times, and enjoyed it. But when it comes to building systems that people pay to develop & maintain, I haven't found any use cases recently. No doubt there are some, but I suspect they're much less justifiable today.
  - ddingus 7y ago
    Putting pay under emphasis does not add any value to your earlier comment. It's a big world out there. Guess I shall reply with same.
  - ddingus 7y ago
    Let me expand a bit. Was tired when I wrote the snarky comment. In a typical corporate environment, yes. Your thoughts ring true. It is a big world outside that scene, and many playing there can benefit from Forth. That is the utility. People who grok Forth flat out solve hard problems like no other. Tool for that toolbox, essentially.