Re: GS Forth II

[wbaguhn@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Will Baguhn)]

In article <go17938@pro-palmtree.cts.com>,
Richard Der <rder@pro-palmtree.cts.com> wrote:
> 
>bird@MCS.COM (J. L. Walters) wrote:
>>I think you are talking about GS16Forth. If so, it is great.
> 
>Yes, that is it.
> 
>>It is excellant. You will need one or more books on Forth:
>>
>>Title:  Starting Forth
>>Author: Leo Brodie
>>Pub:    Prentice-Hall Software Series
>>ISBN:   0-13-843075-9
>>
>>Title:  Thinking Forth
>>Author: Leo Brodie
>>Pub:    Prentice-Hall Software Series
>>ISBN:   0-13-917568-7
> 
>Great, I will look for the books.
> 
>>Hope this helps,
> 
>It does, thanks. Beginners will love this info. It is hard to justify
>an expensive compiler if one dosn't know the language yet, but because
>GS16Forth is freeware, I will give it a shot.
> 
> 
>johnlb@Primenet.Com (John Bowling) wrote:
>>I haven't used Forth much lately, but I did a lot of it a few
>>years back. Forth is a very good language for beginners (and I know
>>some of you C and Pascal diehards will disagree with that).  It is
>>easy to learn, with the interactive nature that BASIC has.
> 
>Question: would knowledge of BASIC stunt learning Forth? It has been
>said that BASIC programmers have a hard time moving on to Pascal
>sometimes.
>
>
>-----
>The Palmtree BBS  310-453-8726 v.32
>Inet: rder@pro-palmtree.cts.com
>

Forth is a simple to learn language, with the power of C and the code
size of assembly.  Forth is actually easier to learn than basic, and
once you stop trying to think of everything Forth in terms of Basic,
you'll be fine (give it about a week).

Oh yes... did I mention that Forth is fast, on both compiles and runtime
speed?  There's no complicated equations to try and turn into machine code,
it's much simpler arithmetic which closer maps to machine code.  ;)

Also, you might want to check out comp.lang.forth and the Forth Interest Group
for more help on Forth in general.

-- 
                                      --- Rev. SPQR (wbaguhn@nyx.net)