Author: Dan Andersson
Date: 11:47:42 02/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
Hear, Hear! I also tend to the Forth camp. I was introduced to them both about the same time in the seventies. Forth lacks first class functions and it is not immediately obvious how the stack is manipulated by a word by its use alone. But I find that the CREATES DOES construct infinitely powerful. As well the fact that Forth is sematics and no syntax. And the Reverse Polish Notation (RPN) is more pure that PN and parantheses, IMO. The possibility to use assembler directly in the high level code is an added bonus. If one wants to go whole hog FP there are Forth-like languages like Joy. Those belong to the Concatenative Languages group. If I am to design a Domain Specific Language for chess f.ex. both LISP/Scheme and Forth are definite primary candidates. MvH Dan Andersson
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.