lgb wrote:
In article , says...
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.
It's not the registers, it's keeping track of what's on the stack that
drove most folks crazy. One of the other well-known comments about
Forth was "Forth is a write-only language." I could usually read what
I'd written if I went back to it within a few months, but that was about
the limit.
One can write "write-only" code in any language...Forth has it's
practitioners of the art as does every other language.
Some of the most legible code I've ever seen was Forth--of course, it
was written by some true experts. I recall an automated loom weaving
control program presented at the Rochester Forth Conference some years
ago. I was actually like reading a piece of literature for clarity--all
one need was a dictionary to understand the English definitions of
technical terms for weaving and the whole code was transparent.
Some of Chuck Moore's code was that way as well while other was well,
dense might be a good description!