Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!purdue!decwrl!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!glasgow!orr
From: orr@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Fraser Orr)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Single User Standards
Message-ID: <1653@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>
Date: 22 Sep 88 18:40:05 GMT
References: <1593@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <810002@hpmtlx.HP.COM>
Reply-To: orr%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nss.ucl.ac.uk (Fraser Orr)
Organization: Comp Sci, Glasgow Univ, Scotland
Lines: 42

In article <810002@hpmtlx.HP.COM> adam@hpmtlx.HP.COM ($Adam Kao) writes:
>There is another point you made which I think deserves answer.  You mentioned
>that extensible languages lead to 'Towers of Babel' when many programmers
>try to work together on the same project.  This may be the most relevant
>thing you've said yet :-).  In fact, I think you should read "Computer
>Languages" by Naomi S. Baron, Anchor Press/Doubleday.  Ms. Baron is a linguist,
>and her assessment of twenty-two popular and interesting computer languages
>is both insightful and fair.  (Needless to say, her assessment of Forth pays
>appropriate homage to its unique power :-).

As I've said previously, I think a linguist is probably the least
qualified of all people to make judgments about programming languages
then again I probably do Ms Baron an injustice, not having read her
book.

[ Stuff deleted, saying in essence ...
>are designed for rapid prototyping, usually one programmer with one vision.  
]

>So this is really a question of technology appropriate to the situation.  What
>you say about large programming projects is true, but you haven't acknowledged
>the OTHER programming philosophy.
>
>I subscribe to the second philosophy.  I am not interested in creating huge
>systems where my contribution is relatively minor.  I am not interested in
>programming for the Department of Defense.  I view programming as a form of
>personal expression, a way to create order and pattern that rivals poetry
>in power and insight.

Interesting how some people get their kicks :->
Really though if this is your thing then I feel that you are posting
in the wrong group. I thought this group discussed the technical
aspects of forth, not the aesthetic qualities. If this is your interest
then fine, but I don't really want to talk to you about it :->
Moreover it isn't really computer programming. Perhaps though it is
me that is wrong, do the rest of you want to discuss the artistic merits
of various programming languages?

>Adam

Regards,
===Fraser.