Newsgroups: comp.realtime,comp.robotics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!uhog.mit.edu!sgiblab!cs.uoregon.edu!usenet.ee.pdx.edu!fastrac.llnl.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!trib.apple.com!amd!netcomsv!netcomsv!netcom.com!jfox
From: jfox@netcom.com (Jeff Fox)
Subject: Re: Forth (was Re: Real-time systems:  Windows-NT or QNX)
Message-ID: <jfoxCy004w.3Bo@netcom.com>
Sender: jfox@netcom.com (Jeff Fox)
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <jfoxCxxs76.D3p@netcom.com> 
            <jfoxCxzM0p.7AI@netcom.com> <bagpiperCxzssz.x8@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 1994 01:00:32 GMT
Lines: 98
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.realtime:7281 comp.robotics:14603

In article <bagpiperCxzssz.x8@netcom.com>
            bagpiper@netcom.com (Michael Hunter) writes:
>
>: >If an engineer working for me came up with this comarison I would probably
>: >start discounting his advice.  Sorry.  I like and have used Forth and

  Thanks for only "discounting his advice", I might expect to get fired
  in the real world for advice of that type! :-)

>: >shameless pushing of Forth as you do above is damaging to Forth.
>
>: What part would you discount?
>
>The rampant exageration in the earlier post leads me not to be able to 
>believe your claims in this post.  A kindof "the boy who cried wolf".  
>If your first analysis would have been reasonable
>then I might have been really impressed with this one and followed up
>with some interest.  We have some field devices that might benefit from
>the type of Forth hardware you are talking about.  Oh well, I've always
>had a hard time not getting a bad taste in my mouth from car sales tactics.

Ok, so I admit to a little fun.  I am sorry if it left a bad taste
in your mouth.  I have found this thread funny (ROTFL) just could
not hold back.  I appologize to you, to anyone else with a bad taste
in their mouth, and to Forth.  But I imagine it is too late now. ;-(

>: Shameless? Sure why not?  Forth gets a lot of bad press for lots
>: of things, and one of them seem to be that people dismiss Forth
>: for many reasons.  I just hate to see people trying to solve
>: problems in the real world make things so difficult for themselves.
>
>I agree with the last sentence.  What Forth *doesn't* need is to be
>proposed for everything so it just gets mentioned.  It also doesn't
>need impossible-to-stand-up-to-in-most-cases sales tactics.  Those are
>both "bad press".
>

Well I didn't and wouldn't propose Forth for everything.  I still 
stand behind the suggestion that  Forth might be an ideal solution
to this problem "where an error could cause a dissaster in the
real world!"  A system that can be proven bug free might be the
most important thing here.  Performance might also be important. 

> \ snip \
>It turns out that I agree that there are lots of options.  But you have
>to realize that people don't like change.  They would rather use what
>they are familiar with.  By banging them over the head with how far out
>and wonderful Forth is with numbers that seem out of this world you
>are more then likely to turn most people off.
>
>Sorry I've rattled so much...
>
>		mph
>-- 
>* Michael Hunter	bagpiper@netcom.com or QUICS: mphunter

Its ok, I enjoyed your posts.  I accept too that you are right about
my not getting the result I want by "banging people over the head
with ..."

Many beginners in Forth do suggest it should be used for  everthing,
until they try it, or get fired.  It is part of Forth reputation and
as such I often assume that you cannot say anything about Forth
without many people just dissmissing anything you say as being
from a Forth nut!  Your damned if you do, your damned if you don't.

I always assume that if I talk about ANY of the details or use ANY
numbers when I describe working on custom Forth chips with Chuck Moore
that most people will assume:

    1.  This guy is nuts.
    2.  This guy is a Forth nut.
    3.  This guy must be a snake oil saleman because he is using numbers
        from a different universe than the one I live in.
    4.  Even if this guy is right it doesn't apply to my world, I know
        they would lock me up if I said that.
    5.  Could be, but who cares?

My numbers about the specifics of WINDOWS/WINDOWS-NT/OS2/QNX are only
meant to be within a couple of order magnitude range to make a point.
Let the experts in these fill in the details to five decimal places,
I admit I am not an expert in these.

My numbers about Chuck's latest chip that is available now are 
accurate.  My numbers about what Chuck is working on now are still
estimates, but should be close.  

You can discount the validity of this information (as can any readers
here) for any number of reasons.  If it leaves a bad taste, if
you don't like my humor, or if the fact that I am a nut and a Forth nut,
or whatever, I understand.

I try to tone it down, really.  If I were to talk about the really
great and amazing stuff..... (  stuff deleted because I worry
about large  crowds carrying torches )  :-)

Jeff Fox
Ultra Technology - sci fi chips too amazing to talk about
