The original IBM PC was a quick-and-dirty design; performance was not a goal.
FORTH is an opposite: Simplicity and flexibility are at the heart of its design, with carefully considered access to assembly language where required for performance or access to bare metal. The design requires trading conventional convenience for that. More conventional schemes for access to bare metal involve complex, fragile, non-portable and expensive platform development tools. Given engineering talent able to use FORTH, FORTH makes sense. The wide-open architecture of FORTH requires discipline, documentation, and careful management to write code that not only runs but can be read and maintained. I haven't made a career of embedded systems work, but I have done a few small projects of that sort, and I think that FORTH holds its own in the right hands. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/45bc7b8a-db98-4143-8fc0-fc932272306en%40googlegroups.com.
