In comp.unix.shell Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I've programmed in Perl but I'm no Perl-programmer notwithstanding.
> Some more or less obvious reasons I see...
> Abstraction of diverse Unix utilities' interfaces.
> (...)
> Supporting data structures (beyond primitive arrays).
> Less quirks than Shell. (I'm saying that as an experienced Shell programmer.)

I find perl much more quirky. Among many other things, it lacks an
straightforward support of nested data structures (you neeed to use
something called references), as it flattens nested arrays automatically.
That was an erroneous early design decission.

$ clisp <<< "(print '(1 2 3 (4 5)))"
....
(1 2 3 (4 5))

$ python3 <<< "print((1,2,3,(4,5)))"
(1, 2, 3, (4, 5))

$ perl -e "use Data::Dumper; @a=(1,2,3,(4,5)); print Dumper(\@a)"
$VAR1 = [
1,
2,
3,
4,
5
];

That being said, no other language comes close in conciseness when it
comes to text processing and interacting with the OS (filesystem, pipes, etc).
Any other language is too verbose for those tasks.

https://wiki.c2.com/?WhyLovePerl

On Sun, 14 Apr 2024 20:41:28 +0000, Javier wrote:

> I find perl much more quirky. Among many other things, it lacks an
> straightforward support of nested data structures (you neeed to use
> something called references), as it flattens nested arrays
> automatically. That was an erroneous early design decission.

Is *that* where PHP got that stupid idea from? Only its attempt to patch
them up with “references” just created a new mess.

> That being said, no other language comes close in conciseness when
> it comes to text processing and interacting with the OS (filesystem,
> pipes, etc). Any other language is too verbose for those tasks.

Other languages can offer more expressive facilities, though. This can
make the code easier to follow.

Javier wrote:

> That being said, no other language comes close in conciseness when it
> comes to text processing and interacting with the OS (filesystem, pipes,
> etc).
> Any other language is too verbose for those tasks.

Perhaps no other language, but i could imagine e.g. a library for a
language getting there.

--
Blue-Maned_Hawk│shortens to Hawk│/blu.mɛin.dʰak/│he/him/his/himself/Mr.
blue-maned_hawk.srht.site
As always.

On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 12:43:56 -0000 (UTC), Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:

> .. i could imagine e.g. a library for a language getting there.

Especially a language that is particularly versatile and adaptable to
defining DSLs.

On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:12:23 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 12:43:56 -0000 (UTC), Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
>
> > .. i could imagine e.g. a library for a language getting there.
>
> Especially a language that is particularly versatile and adaptable to
> defining DSLs.

*waits for a Forth-head to chime in*

On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:29:51 -0700, John Ames wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:12:23 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Especially a language that is particularly versatile and adaptable to
>> defining DSLs.
>
> *waits for a Forth-head to chime in*

Forth? Not a chance. That’s only fit for a museum. Whatever interesting
features it might have had were carried over to PostScript, which took
things to the next level.

On 16/04/2024 00:58, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:29:51 -0700, John Ames wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:12:23 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Especially a language that is particularly versatile and adaptable to
>>> defining DSLs.
>>
>> *waits for a Forth-head to chime in*

What about Scala? I don't the language myself, but I believe it is
popular as a basis for DSL's.

>
> Forth? Not a chance. That’s only fit for a museum. Whatever interesting
> features it might have had were carried over to PostScript, which took
> things to the next level.

Forth is alive and well, albeit not very common. It is used in embedded
systems - it is almost certainly the smallest language and run-time
system where you can have a extendable high-level language, and runs
directly on even very small microcontrollers. Within the same language,
you can glide between higher level words and Forth-style assembly for
low-level code. And you can pretty much freely choose where you draw
the line between pre-compiled code for maximal efficiency and
interpreted code for maximal convenience and development speed. I've
even seen a system with a soft processor (i.e., one made in a hardware
design language for use in FPGA's or gate array ASICs) written in Forth,
where you can move the boundaries between the parts that are implemented
in hardware and the parts in software.

Forth is also the basis for the assembly and code for most stack-based
processors, which are used whenever the smallest die area is needed. In
particular, 4-bit microcontroller programming is dominated by Forth.
You don't normally see such chips, because they are hidden inside
devices and these days only found within other chips (the last
general-purpose easily available 4-bit microcontroller line was
discontinued about a decade ago).

New Forth-native hardware has been made in recent times, such as the
GreenArray chips.

The latest Forth standard is from 2012, I believe.

Forth is certainly old, and certainly a very unusual language that is
hard for outsiders to comprehend, and certainly not a particularly
popular language, but it is equally certainly still used.

(I am not a "Forth-head", and know only a little of the language, but
happen to have learned a bit from real Forth-heads.)

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:14:38 +0200
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>Forth is also the basis for the assembly and code for most stack-based
>processors, which are used whenever the smallest die area is needed. In
>particular, 4-bit microcontroller programming is dominated by Forth.
>You don't normally see such chips, because they are hidden inside
>devices and these days only found within other chips (the last
>general-purpose easily available 4-bit microcontroller line was
>discontinued about a decade ago).

Old style digital watches maybe?

On 16/04/2024 10:35, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:14:38 +0200
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>> Forth is also the basis for the assembly and code for most stack-based
>> processors, which are used whenever the smallest die area is needed. In
>> particular, 4-bit microcontroller programming is dominated by Forth.
>> You don't normally see such chips, because they are hidden inside
>> devices and these days only found within other chips (the last
>> general-purpose easily available 4-bit microcontroller line was
>> discontinued about a decade ago).
>
> Old style digital watches maybe?
>

Sure. And calculators, remote controls, microwave ovens, wireless keys
(cars, garages, etc.), and vast numbers of other devices. 4-bit
stack-based microcontrollers were a tiny fraction of the die size (and
therefore cost) of even 8-bit devices, and used a tiny fraction of the
power (and therefore could have battery lifetimes of a decade or more).

Stand-alone 4-bit microcontrollers are a thing of the past, but you
still get them inside other chips as sequencers and handling things like
startups or calibration sequences.

On 2024-04-16, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

> Forth is alive and well, albeit not very common. It is used in embedded
> systems - it is almost certainly the smallest language and run-time
> system where you can have a extendable high-level language, and runs
> directly on even very small microcontrollers.

It has also been used since circa 1999 as the embedded language of
the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
being replaced with Lua now.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de

On 16/04/2024 12:58, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2024-04-16, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>
>> Forth is alive and well, albeit not very common. It is used in embedded
>> systems - it is almost certainly the smallest language and run-time
>> system where you can have a extendable high-level language, and runs
>> directly on even very small microcontrollers.
>
> It has also been used since circa 1999 as the embedded language of
> the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
> end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
> being replaced with Lua now.
>

People who have used Forth a lot tend to be very enthusiastic about it,
but it has a long learning curve to get up to speed. This is a big
disadvantage compared to "competitors" like Lua. It is perhaps fair to
say that Forth is alive and well as long as its current users are alive
and well - as they retire, there are relatively few newcomers to the
Forth community.

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:58:49 -0000 (UTC)
Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
>the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
>end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
>being replaced with Lua now.

So moving from one language hardly anyone uses to another that hardly anyone
uses. You can't deny the consistency.

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:00:16 +0200
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>On 16/04/2024 12:58, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>> It has also been used since circa 1999 as the embedded language of
>> the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
>> end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
>> being replaced with Lua now.
>>
>
>People who have used Forth a lot tend to be very enthusiastic about it,

Tbh most people who use a language a lot tend to promote it over others they
don't know. Ask any Python, C++, Java, C# dev what the best language is and
90% of the time they'll say the language they use. For Rust probably 99.99%
but that seems to be becoming more of a cult than a language.

Muttley@dastardlyhq.com writes:
>On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:58:49 -0000 (UTC)
>Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
>>the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
>>end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
>>being replaced with Lua now.
>
>So moving from one language hardly anyone uses to another that hardly anyone
>uses. You can't deny the consistency.
>

We use lua rather extensively in multiple products.

You seem to do nothing but criticize others.

Muttley@dastardlyhq.com <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote at 14:51 this Tuesday (GMT):
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:00:16 +0200
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>>On 16/04/2024 12:58, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>> It has also been used since circa 1999 as the embedded language of
>>> the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
>>> end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
>>> being replaced with Lua now.
>>>
>>
>>People who have used Forth a lot tend to be very enthusiastic about it,
>
> Tbh most people who use a language a lot tend to promote it over others they
> don't know. Ask any Python, C++, Java, C# dev what the best language is and
> 90% of the time they'll say the language they use. For Rust probably 99.99%
> but that seems to be becoming more of a cult than a language.

Agreed, it feels like everyone is praising Rust.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:01:56 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>Muttley@dastardlyhq.com writes:
>>On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:58:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
>>>the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
>>>end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
>>>being replaced with Lua now.
>>
>>So moving from one language hardly anyone uses to another that hardly anyone
>>uses. You can't deny the consistency.
>>
>
>We use lua rather extensively in multiple products.
>
>You seem to do nothing but criticize others.

I've worked in a number of different areas and I've never come across anyone
who mentioned Lua, never mind a company that used it. Whatever you do it
must be rather niche.

On 16/04/2024 at 16:26, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:01:56 GMT
> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>> Muttley@dastardlyhq.com writes:
>>> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:58:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
>>>> the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
>>>> end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
>>>> being replaced with Lua now.
>>>
>>> So moving from one language hardly anyone uses to another that hardly anyone
>>> uses. You can't deny the consistency.
>>>
>>
>> We use lua rather extensively in multiple products.
>>
>> You seem to do nothing but criticize others.
>
> I've worked in a number of different areas and I've never come across anyone
> who mentioned Lua, never mind a company that used it. Whatever you do it
> must be rather niche.
>

I use lua to enhance conky - but yes it is a bit niche, I suppose.

--
Chris Elvidge, England
I WILL NOT USE ABBREV.

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:10:10 -0000 (UTC)
candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
>Muttley@dastardlyhq.com <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote at 14:51 this Tuesday
>(GMT):
>> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:00:16 +0200
>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>>>On 16/04/2024 12:58, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>>>> It has also been used since circa 1999 as the embedded language of
>>>> the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
>>>> end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
>>>> being replaced with Lua now.
>>>>
>>>
>>>People who have used Forth a lot tend to be very enthusiastic about it,
>>
>> Tbh most people who use a language a lot tend to promote it over others they
>
>> don't know. Ask any Python, C++, Java, C# dev what the best language is and
>> 90% of the time they'll say the language they use. For Rust probably 99.99%
>> but that seems to be becoming more of a cult than a language.
>
>
>Agreed, it feels like everyone is praising Rust.

Having looked at Rust I do wonder what the fuss is about. Sure the unsafe
blocks are a nice idea - hopefully something similar might be added to C++ at
some point instead of the useless niche crap the committee keeps throwing in
at the moment - but other than that its a pretty ugly syntax with a lot of
the functionality of C++ missing.

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 16:42:43 +0100
Chris Elvidge <chris@mshome.net> wrote:
>On 16/04/2024 at 16:26, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:01:56 GMT
>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>>> Muttley@dastardlyhq.com writes:
>>>> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:58:49 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
>>>>> the FreeBSD boot loader, another constrained environment. In the
>>>>> end Forth proved too unpopular, few people touched it, and it is
>>>>> being replaced with Lua now.
>>>>
>>>> So moving from one language hardly anyone uses to another that hardly
>anyone
>>>> uses. You can't deny the consistency.
>>>>
>>>
>>> We use lua rather extensively in multiple products.
>>>
>>> You seem to do nothing but criticize others.
>>
>> I've worked in a number of different areas and I've never come across anyone
>> who mentioned Lua, never mind a company that used it. Whatever you do it
>> must be rather niche.
>>
>
>I use lua to enhance conky - but yes it is a bit niche, I suppose.

Is conky your talking teddy bear?

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:43:33 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:

> >>>> So moving from one language hardly anyone uses to another that
> >>>> hardly
> >anyone
> >>>> uses. You can't deny the consistency.
> >>>
> >>> We use lua rather extensively in multiple products.
> >>>
> >>> You seem to do nothing but criticize others.
> >>
> >> I've worked in a number of different areas and I've never come
> >> across anyone who mentioned Lua, never mind a company that used
> >> it. Whatever you do it must be rather niche.
> >
> >I use lua to enhance conky - but yes it is a bit niche, I suppose.
>
> Is conky your talking teddy bear?

It's *very* commonly used as a "bolt-on" solution for scripting in a
wide variety of applications, particularly videogame engines. I eagerly
await your explanation of how that doesn't count since it's outside
your own sphere of experience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_applications_using_Lua
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lua_(programming_language)-scripted_video_games

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 08:49:23 -0700
John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:43:33 -0000 (UTC)
>Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>> >>>> So moving from one language hardly anyone uses to another that
>> >>>> hardly
>> >anyone
>> >>>> uses. You can't deny the consistency.
>> >>>
>> >>> We use lua rather extensively in multiple products.
>> >>>
>> >>> You seem to do nothing but criticize others.
>> >>
>> >> I've worked in a number of different areas and I've never come
>> >> across anyone who mentioned Lua, never mind a company that used
>> >> it. Whatever you do it must be rather niche.
>> >
>> >I use lua to enhance conky - but yes it is a bit niche, I suppose.
>>
>> Is conky your talking teddy bear?
>
>It's *very* commonly used as a "bolt-on" solution for scripting in a
>wide variety of applications, particularly videogame engines. I eagerly
>await your explanation of how that doesn't count since it's outside
>your own sphere of experience.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_applications_using_Lua
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lua_(programming_language)-scripted_vide
>o_games

Oh, games. Serious applications then.

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:51:12 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:

> >I eagerly await your explanation of how that doesn't count since
> >it's outside your own sphere of experience.
>
> Oh, games. Serious applications then.

Ah, the "applications that I don't consider important don't count"
strategy. Magnifique.

John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote at 15:49 this Tuesday (GMT):
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:43:33 -0000 (UTC)
> Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>> >>>> So moving from one language hardly anyone uses to another that
>> >>>> hardly
>> >anyone
>> >>>> uses. You can't deny the consistency.
>> >>>
>> >>> We use lua rather extensively in multiple products.
>> >>>
>> >>> You seem to do nothing but criticize others.
>> >>
>> >> I've worked in a number of different areas and I've never come
>> >> across anyone who mentioned Lua, never mind a company that used
>> >> it. Whatever you do it must be rather niche.
>> >
>> >I use lua to enhance conky - but yes it is a bit niche, I suppose.
>>
>> Is conky your talking teddy bear?
>
> It's *very* commonly used as a "bolt-on" solution for scripting in a
> wide variety of applications, particularly videogame engines. I eagerly
> await your explanation of how that doesn't count since it's outside
> your own sphere of experience.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_applications_using_Lua
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lua_(programming_language)-scripted_video_games

It's also used for Aseprite plugins.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 08:59:12 -0700
John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:51:12 -0000 (UTC)
>Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>> >I eagerly await your explanation of how that doesn't count since
>> >it's outside your own sphere of experience.
>>
>> Oh, games. Serious applications then.
>
>Ah, the "applications that I don't consider important don't count"
>strategy. Magnifique.

I worked in defense writing software for missiles for a while. Also worked
on networking code for systems that literally transfered 100s of millions of
dollars worth of trades a day.

But yeah, I'm sure scripting actions on Fortnite and Call of Duty compare.
Even the game engines are written in C++.

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 16:13:01 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:

> I worked in defense writing software for missiles for a while. Also
> worked on networking code for systems that literally transfered 100s
> of millions of dollars worth of trades a day.

*golf clap*

> But yeah, I'm sure scripting actions on Fortnite and Call of Duty
> compare. Even the game engines are written in C++.

Frequently, yes! But when you go making statements like "nobody uses"
when what you really mean is "*I* don't use," endlessly redefining the
terms of your argument in an attempt to back-port correctness into your
original statement only draws further attention to how you ran off your
mouth without bothering to think in the first place.