Jazelle?

But programming in Forth _IS_ programming in assembly languge, a simulation of the assembly language of the English Electric KDF9 which was published as prior art when Forth was first conceived.

As to the characteristics that you listed, all apply equally well to a number of other interpreted environments such as Python and TCL.

It is clear that you don't know much about Forth. You are zeroed in on the fact that the language appears to emulate a stack machine. It is also odd that you are solely focused on the KDF9 which is a machine that Chuck Moore is unlikely to have ever seen while the Burroughs B5500 was a machine he specifically talks about.

This last one is particularly interesting in that it specifically says there is *no* connection between Moore's work on Forth and the KDF9 or

Yes, so you agree Forth is not assembly language?

You can add HP 3000 to the pack.

Yeah, it really wouldn't be hard to get used to.

That seems like it was the main thing I didn't like about the syntax. I was used to reduce's syntax at the time but that's back a bit. I might not like it either now (Oh, hey, there's a raspberry pi version of reduce. There, that keeps this on topic :-)

I'm enough used to the implied zero that it seems natural, I think maple and reduce might allow it also. derive assumes =0 but if you have more than one variable it asks ``solve variable: x'' where the x can be changed.

In maxima: (%i1) x^2+x*y+y^2; 2 2 (%o1) y + x y + x (%i2) solve(%);

solve: more unknowns than equations. Unknowns given : [y, x] Equations given: 2 2 [y + x y + x ] -- an error. To debug this try: debugmode(true); (%i3) solve(%o1,x); (sqrt(3) %i + 1) y (sqrt(3) %i - 1) y (%o3) [x = - ------------------, x = ------------------] 2 2 (%i4) solve(%o1=12,x); 2 2 sqrt(3) sqrt(16 - y ) + y sqrt(3) sqrt(16 - y ) - y (%o4) [x = - -------------------------, x = -------------------------] 2 2

The maxima error message does seem a bit big iron, not like a modern release product.

My main concern, with the implied =0, would be if you were using it educationally is that it blurs the distiction between an expression and an equation, something that gives some people trouble in algebra 101.

Ron

Not encountered OCaml before; interesting the idea to enforce different operators for integer and floating point arithmetic.