4 ms·
And I can't see concatenative programming languages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concatenative_programming_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concatenati
by lebuffon 7y ago
And I can't see concatenative programming languages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concatenative_programming_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concatenative_programming_lang...
- tom_mellior 7y agoIn this poster's classification, "basic" Forth (the data manipulation part without parsing words) to me seems to be "procedure" + "cell (state)", i.e., "Imperative programming". This classification is along general semantic lines, not "what syntax do you use to access values". In concatenative languages you use a stack implicitly while in C you use variable names and nested expressions, but this more of a "syntactic" issue than what the poster is concerned with, namely things like "does the language have native closures" which Forth, like C, does not. Parsing words add a huge amount of metaprogramming power, but this classification doesn't deal with any kind of metaprogramming. That's not a dimension that is included here, and even if it were, it would be debatable if it's that different in Forth from Lisp macros, once you look past syntactic concerns as above. But I could very well be wrong here, I'm not an expert on this part.