From: the.beez.speaks@gmail.com   
      
   On 01-06-2024 07:20, dxf wrote:   
   > I just felt this one was a little too reliant/accepting of cliches - which   
   has the   
   > effect of confirming them.   
   Well, two things. First, acknowledge that myths are there. It's hard to   
   debunk a cliche when you deny its existence.. Second, myths don't come   
   into the world spontaneously. There has to be someone to create them -   
   and people that pick them up and perpetuate them.   
      
   Concerning the first one - it's hard to ignore cliches and on the other   
   hand to acknowledge them. And you have to acknowledge them to debunk   
   them. So, let's address a few:   
      
   "Forth is hard". When you've mastered it, it's not hard. For that you   
   have to develop a "feel" for it. That "feel" is very hard to put into   
   words, because - even if you have recognized some patterns - it's quite   
   hard to put into solid, easy applicable rules. To quote a Dutch   
   footballer: "You only get it when you understand it".   
      
   But as a newbie who has only been exposed to Fortran/Algol like   
   languages - it's huge. Because you have to think sequentially while all   
   your other knowledge concerning programming is based on random access.   
      
   I found the same problem when dabbling with Factor - where you have to   
   design a quotation long before using it. And think in fixed stack   
   patterns. It really hurts your brain when starting it.   
      
   And even when I compare stuff I wrote (more than) a decade ago, I see   
   I've improved my skills concerning Forth.   
      
   So from the viewpoint of a newbie - Forth is hard. From the viewpoint of   
   a veteran - not so much.   
      
   "Forth is a write only language". Maybe I addressed it, but I didn't   
   consciously debunk it. That was not the purpose of the video. The   
   purpose of the video was mainly to address the idea why Forth is so hard   
   to learn - and give some pointers how to tackle an algorithm.   
      
   But (again, as a veteran - I think I may claim that title after 30 years   
   of 4tH) I can't agree to that. Badly written programs are hard to   
   maintain - no matter in which language they are written.   
      
   So consequently, badly written Forth is hard to maintain. I've written   
   enough non-trivial programs (like uBasic/4tH and the 4tH preprocessor)   
   which have significantly grown in functionality to know that this is   
   most certainly not true.   
      
   I may do a video on that one later on - because it simply is not true.   
      
   "Stack acrobatics" - I think I pretty much tackled that one in the   
   video. And I think I debunked it more thoroughly than the "Stylish   
   stack". But maybe I'm mistaken. Don't touch the prophet ;-)   
      
   Hans Bezemer   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)