3 ms·
I would guess that's for economic reasons rather than technical ones. I think that lispm were considered a great technical success by many people. The problem w
by mumblemumble 7y ago
I would guess that's for economic reasons rather than technical ones. I think that lispm were considered a great technical success by many people. The problem was that they were a lot more expensive, and much more limited in what you could do with them (not quite "You can program in any language as long as it's lisp, but you get the idea). That constrained them to a relatively tiny market, which in turn limited the amount of money that could go into R&D on the technology. So it was doomed to fall behind.
Java processors, I'm still not sure what the target market there was. It's easy to imagine at least an academic market for lisp machines, particularly during the 1980s and perhaps the early 1990s. But, particularly in a post-1995 software environment, it's hard to imagine a large-scale (as in, not embedded) computing project that can reasonably commit itself to Java, and it's also hard for me to imagine an embedded application where Java would be preferable to a low-level language. Which is also more of an economic problem - they might have worked really well from a technical perspective, but that doesn't mean they weren't a solution in search of a problem.
- mud_dauber 7y agoI joined the RTX team at Harris Semi after grad school. The only devt environment they could offer customers was (as I remember it) completely Forth-based - the barrier to entry was awfully steep, even for greenfield projects.
- astrobe_ 7y agoI learned Forth by myself with Pygmy Forth (no Internet, no book, just the docs of that system) when I was 15 or so. It was my third language after Basic and assembler. I believe that the challenge of Forth is not to learn it, but to unlearn the rest. It is difficult to forget what you know. It's difficult to forget about dynamic memory allocation, classes, local variables, type checking... And frustrating too. It's like video games. When I was a kid/teen, I could do over and over again a level until I succeeded. Not today. I would lose patience and bitch about the poor game/level design because I think I know better. I am more often wrong than right on this. Adult programmers and engineers are like that. They think they know better, so when something is difficult for them, they blame it on the language. They don't have the really open mind kids have. If there's a barrier to entry, it is not in Forth.
- mud_dauber 7y agoI think I agree with you. Forth was (fortunately IMO) the first language I really grokked after undergrad. Before that it was assembly, Apple Basic & (shudder) Fortran. I had zero exposure to CS 101. So Forth warped my brain in all the right ways.
- dri_ft 7y ago> I would guess that's for economic reasons rather than technical ones. I think that lispm were considered a great technical success by many people. Hey, an economic failure's a failure. The technically perfect machine that doesn't exist because no market would buy it... doesn't exist.