this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2024
33 points (92.3% liked)
Programming
19403 readers
610 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not knowing forth, why would you ever want this language?
Besides the fun of stretching your mental muscles to think in a different paradigm, Forth is usually used in the embedded devices domain (like that of the earlier Mars rover I forgot the name of).
This project for me is mostly for the excitement and joy I get out of implementing a Forth (which is usually done in Assembler and C) on the JVM. While I managed to keep the semantics the same the underlying machinery is vastly different from, say, GForth. I find this quite a pleasing exercise.
Last but not least, if you like concatenative but were unable to practice fun on the JVM, bjForth may be what you're looking for.
Hope this answers your question.
It looks to me to be the same paradigm as pure functional languages, is this false? The only difference to lisp seems syntactic.
No. Roughly speaking, functional languages implicitly manage the stack for you, whereas Forth requires you to manage it explicitly.