Re: [colorforth] TCP State Engine

[Mark Slicker <maslicke@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 17 Apr 2004, Jonah Thomas wrote:

> > I think Forth could be a complete break through if people didn't try to
> > marginalize it in one way or another. Chuck as defined the axioms, where
> > do these axioms lead? I don't think anyone has fully explored the
> > implications of Forth.
>
> Agreed, the sun will probably go out before we reach all the
> implications, even if we get the entire programming community doing it.

This is true. However, at the same time I think we can get a much fuller
picture of what Forth implies.

The results of the industry to this point may be stated as the carring out
of the implications of C. C is a basic assumtion for most, a "portable
assembler", a "systems language". C is language with almost all
processor designers and hardware designers keep in mind. Perhaps it is
possible to write better C than exists, but the language has definite
limits.

One thing that interests me about Chuck Moore's work, and Jeff Fox's
work. Is that they say, what happens if we throw out all the previously
unchallenged assumptions? Chuck has defined a new framework, a MISC
architecture, and an environment colorForth.

Some of things I think about. What happens, when you can compile and run
applications faster than other systems can load them (literally in the
blink of an eye)? I think this is a major result of the colorForth
environment. What happens when you can write a system to achieve
contemporary tasks in orders of magnitude less code? What are the
implications of a compact markup language (FML)? And then there is
the implications of replacing rather antiquated hardware, with hardware
which is designed amplify the results of the environment.

Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: colorforth-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: colorforth-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Main web page - http://www.colorforth.com