FORTH

Dennis Brown see3d at writeme.com
Sun Oct 16 21:27:04 EDT 2005


Mark,

One of the great things about Forth was the overhead of just a few  
machine language instructions to execute a high level function call.   
Transcript seems to require a trip around the world to jump next  
door.  For GUI speed stuff, it would not be a problem, but for my  
array crunching stuff, I am stuck writing everything in one handler  
to keep the speed up.  The convenience of having an environment like  
that would be very tempting to use for whatever could stand the  
overhead --and that might be quit a lot of applications.

Dennis

On Oct 16, 2005, at 7:01 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:

> Dennis-
>
> Sunday, October 16, 2005, 9:58:04 AM, you wrote:
>
>
>> to Forth.  Forth is a low level but extensible language and IDE from
>>
>
> Forth? (Running over to x's web site to check it out...) Forth is as
> close to the metal as you can get without writing in ones and zeros.
>
>
>> One of the weaknesses of XTalk/Transcript in my opinion was that you
>> could not directly and efficiently extend the language in this  
>> same way.
>>
>
> XTalk would be more on the path to Forthness if we could overload
> keywords and add new ones. Of course, that would probably also require
> namespaces and an include mechanism. Imagine patching "trunc" so that
> it does the right thing by:
>
> function trunc pValue
>   return trunc(pValue & "")
> end trunc
>
> -- 
> -Mark Wieder
>  mwieder at ahsoftware.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>




More information about the use-livecode mailing list