Forth semantics work nicely as unstructured glue, I've found. As you start getting into the weeds of algorithm design it becomes more of a puzzle. But that also

Forth semantics work nicely as unstructured glue, I've found. As you start getting into the weeds of algorithm design it becomes more of a puzzle. But that also makes sense, in a Forther context. The most Forth-like thing to do is not to start abstracting and imposing structure so that you can have a configurable algorithm, but to define down the problem to a table of static results, and thus complete the circle of "code is data". I believe Chuck Moore said something to the effect of Forth being in the workflow and mindset: once you have a problem defined to need that much complexity of automation, it's not a problem solved by Forth-the-language. Of course, Moore also has done some algorithmically complex things with Forth-the-language, so I might be off-base in that assessment.