Re: [stack] Survey: Your impressions and thoughts about concatenative languages

I share many of your experiences, Joe. Good answers.

Joe Bowbeer <[email protected]> wrote:
> > - My negative experiences with concatenative language have been ...
> Trying to program in Joy.

You might want to try out some of the other concatenative languages; I
understand that Factor is gaining steam as a practical language in
spite of its recent origin (and concatenative syntax).

> > - I feel that for concatenative languages to gain more mainstream
> > success will require ...

> A major breakthrough in ease of programming, or the identification of
> a lively niche where they provide great leverage.

Either or both would be wonderful. What's your biggest annoyance in
terms of "ease of programming"?

Embedded systems are a place where Forth has seen some success;
strongForth's typechecking was actually built for that. Ripple
(http://ripple.fortytwo.net/about/) is an interesting application of
concatenativity to the semantic web. The author of Enchilada
(http://my.opera.com/rapido/blog/?startidx=20) claims -- with some
support -- that concatenative languages are uniquely and especially
suited to parallel processing. And, of course, it would be unwise to
ignore the always pioneering work of Chuck Moore, now in hardware at
www.intellasys.net (or a discussion at
http://www.falvotech.com/blog/index.php?/archives/200-Forth-Day-Report.html,
search for "After lunch").

> > - I consider a language to be concatenative when it has the following
> > properties ...
> Concatenation is just about everything.

Sounds like a good koan.

"And all at once, William was enlightened."

> Bowbeer Joe --

-Wm