I've always had a soft spot for FORTH. I think the magic of it is how little assembly you need to write before you are writing your FORTH system in FORTH. So i

I've always had a soft spot for FORTH. I think the magic of it is how little assembly you need to write before you are writing your FORTH system in FORTH. So in my opinion this is somewhat antithetical to the idea of FORTH > 100% C/C++ with multi-platform support. Though classic implementation of primitives in assembly language and scripted high-level words gave the power to Forth, it also became the hurtle for newbies. Because they have to learn the assembly and Forth syntax before peeking into the internal beauty of Forth. Fair enough to write a core of FORTH in C as a kind of portable assembler but most of the system should be written in FORTH in my opinion, then you can change it from FORTH. As fast as I can see eForth is written entirely in C. Anyway FORTH is fun, writing your own is fun too and a great educational experience, but despite being a fan, I wouldn't write anything serious in it today. It is much too low level and it has even less memory safety than C! The elegance of it continues to impress though with functional programming to get the job done and compile time programming to mold the language into that DSL which expresses the problem perfectly.