Saw the same joke with Postscript many years ago.
I don't think anyone loves PostScript though...
Don Lancaster did. He used to write programs in Postscript to make figures - he preferred that to using drawing programs.
Forth
51–56 of 56 posts
Re: Forth
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think anyone loves PostScript though...
Don Lancaster did. He used to write programs in Postscript to make figures - he preferred that to using drawing programs.
I think he did that only to impress his hacker friends. ;-)
And because laser printers were often the fastest computer in the office.
Re: Forth
#53Re: Forth
#54Hey whatever happened to Factor? That was an amazingly professional offering in a weird and dusty corner of the programming languages.
it's somewhat alive.
they do some releases, they have a somewhat big project of rewriting vm in zig.
Re: Forth
#55Can someone explain for me?
A different way to say the same: in forth, words get pushed on the stack, and popped from the stack by words that take arguments: code stack I Forth love Forth love I love I Forth ; love presumably pops ; subject, object args ; from stack - and does something ; perhaps prints as side effect
Actually the stack is wrong here, after pushing two words, the sequence should be:
Forth
IRe: Forth
#56is it me or is forth coming up a lot lately? or am i just having a plate-o-shrimp situation?
It's archaic, powerful, expressive, compact. I'd describe it as an interactive macro-assembler on steroids. What's not to like? But it's different. Certainly not for everyone (imho that makes it even more interesting). So yeah, shouldn't hurt the HN audience to pop by now & then.
I'm not complaining - I even have a Forth pet project myself. Just noticing that it's showing up a lot lately.