Re: The Promise of Forth

Frank Buss <fb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:

> Duke Normandin wrote:
>
>> Please give this newbie some hope for Forth!
>
> Forth is not like a tree, which needs water to live and for which you
can
> have some hopes. It is more like mathematics: The standard is written
and
> if Forth works for your project, you can use it. And because of the
simple
> basic concepts, it is even possible to write your own implementation, if
> you need it, unlike e.g. for C++, which needs many man years of work.

Language lives in usage, not in grammar book. You can use Latin or ancient
Russian, will you?

> And I think there are more active Forth programmers than posters in this
> newsgroup, maybe because of too many non-technical postings like this
one.

So? You may be stubborn enough, yet 

>> Let's resurrect FIG!! Can we do that together? Can we crank out a
>> "generic Forth" that we can all live with to be the new FIG flagship?
>
> There is already an ongoing process for the next Forth:
>
> http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
>
> If you want to change something, you can participate in the RfD/CfV
> process.

There's not a single point in having this standard. E.g. Ada is
standardized, PERL is not, compare number of users, compare the
volume of published software.


-- 
CKOPO BECHA...
   CKOPO CE3OH...