BASIC vs Python
dscottr at bellatlantic.net
Sun Dec 19 03:58:41 CET 2004
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:41:11 -0600, Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> wrote:
>Scott Robinson <dscottr at bellatlantic.net> writes:
>> Forth seems better than basic, but is *weird* (I tried it for a
>> while). I'm not sure going from Forth to C (or Python) would be much
>> easier than Basic to C or Python. The biggest disappointment for
>> Forth was that no significant Forth chips were made (and none until it
>> was too late). A machine designed to be run on Forth would have been
>> unbelievably powerful from the late 70s to the mid 90s (it would be
>> more painful now than the x86 legacy, but still).
>I think you overestimate how long the Forth chip would have been a
>serious competitor to x`the x86 line. LISP chips - which should have
>all the same advantages - didn't last that long.
I didn't say it would be any more effective commercially, only that it
would be unbelievably powerful:). I suppose the painfulness of the
legacy would be ditching the system wholesale for something else.
Consider what the amiga faithful went through, and then extend on it
(since the amiga was designed by the same team as the Atari 400/800,
it would be a good candidate for the job).
More information about the Python-list