Forth and sour grapes

["Myron Plichota" <myron.plichota@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The MISC list has been very lively lately with "religious" arguments, and I
just can't resist putting in my own 2 cents worth.

I am a hardware/software guy who has had many years of totally satisfactory
experiences using Forth to develop some extremely serious applications. I
have yet to meet an anti-Forth bigot who had actually tried using it, let
alone mastered it. It is apparent that these jerks don't really care
whether they know whereof they speak and just keep parroting conventional
wisdom and outright lies that poison the ground that otherwise would
support wider acceptance of Forth. I resent the fact that it has been an
uphill battle for me to sell Forth to my bosses and colleagues and that I
have sometimes had to be a mutineer when Forth was the best choice to meet
the various goals of a system.

I stand by my loyalty to the Forth approach based on the elegance and
economy of the implementations and total lack of failures that I have
enjoyed even as a novice with lousy style let alone these days. I have no
compunctions about insulting those who have cluttered up this mailing list
with their wearisome yackety-yack, in fact I wish that they (you know who
you are) would simply spare the rest of us of your ignorant ego trips.

If anyone is entitled to an ego trip, it is those Forth programmers who
have the wit to simply not outsmart themselves, follow the KISS rule, and
deliver the goods. I have often worked on multiprocessor projects and
witnessed the desparate finger pointing and excuse making of hapless C
programmers when they cannot understand what is going on under their own
hood and thrash around with inefficient program design. Then they get
pissed off when the processor programmed in Forth crosses the finish line
first and go off and sulk and then secretly complain to the boss, who knows
jack-shit about fuck-all in the first place buts has a dim, plant-like
awareness of "risk reduction", i.e. anything not understood despite its
simplicity is to be feared. Superstition and monkey politics would be best
left out of the arena, but there you have it.

I know how to program in C as well and for starters always critique the
machine code generated whenever I'm getting to know a new compiler. I have
total respect for especially the GNU toolchain; it is a collosal achievment
given the complexities involved. I would never, ever even attempt writing
my own C compiler. At the same time, I know that C portability is a myth
and that the "never re-invent the wheel" mentality saddles applications
with wheels that are sometimes missing spokes and seriously out of round
with no *simple* remedy. Rabid C-only programmers usually show an alarming
lack of imagination and even common sense at times. I'm not saying that
there are no good C heads, but in my considerable experience the
rank-and-file has a tendency to arrogance and unearned smugness. I don't
know why this is for sure. Maybe they reckon they are "on the winning
team", which has an element of truth to it from a political standpoint.

Having persevered with both C and Forth approaches, I have to say that I
greatly prefer the entire process of system development when I have the
luxury of doing the software in Forth. Opinions are like
assholes...everyone has one. I cannot respect the uninformed opinions of
ant-men who insist that if you are not in a Boeing 747, you're just not
flying. I prefer an F-16 or MiG-29 thank you very much. Maybe there is hope
for one or two of you out there, but not unless you are willing to roll up
your sleeves and maybe learn something about value of simplicity in the
process.

The MISC chips are something that the world definitely needs, as works of
art as well as useful tools of the trade. Those of you who don't dig the
work of art aspect probably are wasting your time subscribing to this list
and definitely wasting my time with your ill-opined postings. On the other
hand, it's fun defying the nay-sayers ( ;>))

Myron Plichota