3 ms·

Back in the days of 8080 CPUs, I built a number of projects in Forth,including a "discovery system" which adapted patterns from the late Douglas Lenat's Eurisko

Back in the days of 8080 CPUs, I built a number of projects in Forth,including a "discovery system" which adapted patterns from the late Douglas Lenat's Eurisko project, as well as a trading system which, on paper, could have been successful. From that experience, I tend to agree with your intuitions. Now that we have 64-bit CPUs, it's tempting to revisit Forth. What might be missing is he massive collection of libraries we have in other languages. Forth, BTW, historically, has been pushed directly to Silicon in at least two instances, the first one by Chuck Moore [1], the second one designed by Philip Koopman [2] "forth chip" now gives pretty good google. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8860786 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8860786 [2] https://vfxforth.com/flag/jfar/vol6/no1/article1.pdf https://vfxforth.com/flag/jfar/vol6/no1/article1.pdf

spaintech 3y ago
Thank you, yes I’m am aware of the HW CPU forth. Drawing from my own experiential intuition, there’s a significant cost overhead—roughly 30% on hardware (CPU and Memory)—attributable to utilizing OSs that were originally architected to facilitate human interaction and inherently embody extensive code bases. This scenario is further “complexified” when we overlay multiple OS layers (like VM’s or containers) libraries, and additional software to execute applications. Considering the financials, an average server incurs an expenditure of 15-20K, with an additional 20K annually on software to execute applications, and another 10K annually to account for footprint costs. The potential savings here are substantial—around 10K a year per server. Scaling this to a substantial enterprise operating, for instance, 500 servers, the financial implication is pronounced. The Return on Investment (ROI) is likely even more compelling, considering the accumulated savings in various other domains, and this holds true even if the performance efficiency achieved is merely on par with current systems.

spaintech 3y ago

Thank you, yes I’m am aware of the HW CPU forth. Drawing from my own experiential intuition, there’s a significant cost overhead—roughly 30% on hardware (CPU and Memory)—attributable to utilizing OSs that were originally architected to facilitate human interaction and inherently embody extensive code bases. This scenario is further “complexified” when we overlay multiple OS layers (like VM’s or containers) libraries, and additional software to execute applications. Considering the financials, an average server incurs an expenditure of 15-20K, with an additional 20K annually on software to execute applications, and another 10K annually to account for footprint costs. The potential savings here are substantial—around 10K a year per server. Scaling this to a substantial enterprise operating, for instance, 500 servers, the financial implication is pronounced. The Return on Investment (ROI) is likely even more compelling, considering the accumulated savings in various other domains, and this holds true even if the performance efficiency achieved is merely on par with current systems.