Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp

John Doty wrote:
....
> Please leave the argument in place. To snip here is evasion.

Ok.

> My argument is:
> 
> 1. There is little published shareable Forth code, relative to other 
> languages. This seems beyond dispute.
> 
> 2. You and others asserted that this is not because Forth code is not 
> shareable, but because shareable code is proprietary, and that there is 
> plenty of such code.
> 
> This requires that somehow Forth, unlike other programming languages, 
> produces shareable code only if code is not to be published. If this is 
> true, it indicates weaknesses in Forth. Weaknesses, if correctly 
> identified, may often be repaired.
> 
>>
>> There!  Right there, you repeat your basic logical error.  You have 
>> not established any "this requires that..." or "an unavoidable 
>> consequence" link.
> 
> There, right there, you repeat your basic evasion. How is it that Forth 
> can only produce proprietary code?

Forth can certainly produce sharable, publishable code.  There is 
nothing whatever intrinsic to Forth that precludes sharable code.  The 
reason there isn't a lot of published code has nothing to do with Forth 
but a lot to do with the cultures in which it is most widely used.  Your 
assertion that "Forth can only produce proprietary code" is not grounded 
in logic.

>>  You haven't even tried to establish the link.
> 
> You want a *causal* link? Elizabeth's assertion that Forth code sharing 
> requires rigid standards and strong management will do for now. That 
> identifies a debilitating weakness (or more likely, multiple 
> weaknesses). But that's probably not the whole story.

I have never used the term "rigid standards", only principles of sound 
project management, which apply in all kinds of projects with all kinds 
of languages.  Even the very large projects you have described (a number 
of which we have participated in) follow sound management practices and 
internal standards if they are to be successful.

>> You just assume it to be true,
> 
> If it's not true WHERE IS THE CODE?

The effects you cite are not *necessarily* the result of the cause to 
which you attribute them.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310-491-3356
5155 W. Rosecrans Ave. #1018  Fax: +1 310-978-9454
Hawthorne, CA 90250
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================