wmb@MITCH.ENG.SUN.COM (02/12/91)
> First, I'm not very interested in conforming to the standards of other > language so that "we" will be better accepted. ... If we want to be better > accepted by making Forth look like C or Pascal or Fortran there is a much > cheaper, more straight forward shortcut to that goal: just use C or > Pascal or Fortran. Bang! An instant solution. The issue is not whether Forth "looks like C". The issue is whether or not Forth has the set of standard features that programmers have come to expect and *demand* from a modern programming language. A case statement is a case statement. Adding a case statement to a language does not make that language "like C" anymore than adding an automatic transmission to a car makes the car "like a Chrysler". Adding files and floating point and error handling to Forth does not turn Forth into a compile/link/execute language with infix syntax and type checking. They simple allow Forth programs to deal with files and floating point numbers and errors. These things are important because the exist in real world applications. C did not cause them to exist; C merely recognized their existence and then dealt with them. If C had buried its head in the sand and ignored the real world, like Forth and Pascal, it would not have been successful. There is only one way in which I wish Forth to be "like C": C is not a religion or a philosophy or a holy grail or a means of seeking spiritual enlightenment. It is a nuts and bolts engineering tool, addressing practical real-world problems in a straightforward fashion. People use C because, by and large, it works. The Forth community would do well to adopt a similar attitude, rather than seeking "purity of essence" and trying to ignore problems that are unpleasant. Mitch Bradley, wmb@Eng.Sun.COM