3 ms·
It depends on what you're looking for. If you think of Forth as just a macro-assembler that's easy to get started with, then you're going to just use Forth as a
by Karrot_Kream 5y ago
It depends on what you're looking for. If you think of Forth as just a macro-assembler that's easy to get started with, then you're going to just use Forth as a way to bring-up a system and leave. If you think of Forth as a way to build a custom DSL around essential complexity, then you'll be comfortable taking it as high as you'd like. I know most people, especially the types of folks who experiment with languages, view Forth as the former (especially since a lot of these folks are either interested in something high-level like Lisp or with more static assurance like an ML derivative), but if you want to actually see where Forth shines, then you need to actually write high level code in it.
- int_19h 5y agoBut, again, if you think Forth as a way to build a custom DSL, why wouldn't you use Lisp instead, which has a lot more to offer in that department to begin with? OTOH Forth as a universal macro assembler is essentially a unique niche where it not only fits surprisingly well, but it's also obvious as soon as you start using it in that capacity.