Author: Ian Osgood
Date: 16:55:02 02/24/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 23, 2004 at 13:52:47, Christophe Theron wrote: > >I find Forth to be one of the most elegant language that has ever been designed. >It is fast, efficient, and not harder to read than LISP (and because you do not >have to insert the parenthesis I would dare to say that it is easier to write >and more readable than LISP). > >You will not use basic "(operator arg arg)" structures, you will use "arg arg >operator" instead. Same thing, with the order reversed, and without any >parenthesis! > >So to answer your question: yes I find LISP hard to read, and if I was ready to >use a different language I would go to Forth instead of LISP. > I had no idea you liked Forth! You might be interested in my port of TSCP to ANS Forth. It resides at http://www.ultratechnology.com/chess.html. The open stack has lead to a very succinct implementation of the basic alpha-beta algorithm. As crafty is to C, FCP is to Forth: many developers of Forth systems have been optimized to play my program. :) > >Type checking won't write correct programs for you. Writing correct programs >comes from an attitude of being extremely careful and reading your own code >several times before trying it. > By the way, this is also very true in Forth. Although Forth is just about typeless, it is interactive (like LISP), so that you can very easily test your code thoroughly as you write it. Ian Osgood > > Christophe
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.