In article ,
Dave Hinz wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2005 17:02:13 -0700, lgb wrote:
In article , says...
On Wed, 25 May 2005 22:26:01 GMT, Patrick Conroy
wrote:

Second "PC" was a //e that I upped to 128K to run Apple (UCSD) Pascal.
That was fun...

AAAAAAAAAARGH! Someone mentioned UCSD Pascal!

Please, please don't do that. Just for that - FORTAN 77!!!!

I'll see you and raise you a FORTH.

Actually, I rather liked FORTH. Built a 6500-based micro back in, er,
'80 or '81 maybe, that used it. PicoFORTH maybe?

"Forth is a recursive language. You can't understand Forth till you
understand Forth."

Well, if you understand registers and CPU-speak in general, it's not
bad. (thinks) actually, I learned Forth first, which made learning
assembler much easier.

I wrote a Forth interpreter for a Modcomp mini once when I was between
projects and bored. The guy in the next office outdid me - he took the
Forth and used it to build a Lisp interpreter :-).

Now that, is just _wrong_.

DEFINITELY!!

The proper use of FORTH is writing floating-point emulators.

So says the Bible.



"Go FORTH, and multiply"




groan