 | | Re: Thought on pbForth
|
| (...) Neither am I... but the fact is that it's not 20 years ago. My attitude is why use computers as if we are? (btw, I was programming back then... and I must confess that there are a few things I miss about programming in that era [most notably, (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | Re: Thought on pbForth
|
| I am new to this group so please forgive this reply to an old thread. I've been doing embedded realtime software for over 20 years. A small amount of that has been using FORTH. The question is what does FORTH add to robotics software development? To (...) (25 years ago, 19-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | RE: Thought on pbForth
|
| (...) Steve, welcome to LugNet and this group specifically. The pbForth group has been a bit sparse lately, but rest assured good things will happen soon. (...) Sounds like you've got lots of expreince with different paradigms, which is one of the (...) (25 years ago, 20-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | Re: Thought on pbForth
|
| Ralph Hempel writes: > > I've been doing embedded realtime software for > > over 20 years. > > Sounds like you've got lots of expreince with different > paradigms, which is one of the most important aspects > of being a good designer.... My (...) (25 years ago, 20-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | RE: Thought on pbForth
|
| (...) I _knew it_!! But I guess now I'm guilty of preaching to the choir... (...) This is EXACTLY what makes the RCX an ideal entry to computing. Nobody could sell something like a VIC-20 as an entry level to computing. But this is exactly what we (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| |
