# Functional Forth?

## William Tanksley, Jr — 2007-09-20 00:41:57

    http://wiki.forthfreak.net/index.cgi?FunForth

    Functional Forth. Written in a few lines of Forth. Speaks for itself.

    I didn't know that was possible.

    -Billy "fun fact 0=1" (a punny line out of context -- taken from ML source code)

## Chris Double — 2007-09-20 01:43:58

    On 9/20/07, William Tanksley, Jr <wtanksleyjr@...> wrote:

     > http://wiki.forthfreak.net/index.cgi?FunForth

    >

    >  Functional Forth. Written in a few lines of Forth. Speaks for itself.

    >  I didn't know that was possible.

     That's pretty neat. With a few changes  to make it compatible with 4p

    you can write some very Joy like code:

    C{ dup * } { 1 2 3 4 } lmap .list

      => { 1 4 9 16 }

    4p is a forth with some interesting control words:

    http://maschenwerk.de/4p/control-flow.txt

    Chris.

    --

    http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz

## Chris Double — 2007-09-20 02:18:31

    A good discussion with examples about it on comp.lang.forth:

    < http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.forth/browse_thread/thread/8bd3fc4fded00e0c/9c9419a3a6700cff#9c9419a3a6700cff

     >

     or

    http://tinyurl.com/yqfnuv

    Joy gets mentioned as well.

    Chris.

    --

    http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz

## Don Groves — 2007-09-20 04:21:54

    On Sep 19, 2007, at 19:41 , William Tanksley, Jr wrote:

     > http://wiki.forthfreak.net/index.cgi?FunForth

    >

    > Functional Forth. Written in a few lines of Forth. Speaks for itself.

    > I didn't know that was possible.

     Forth is one of the most malleable languages in existence due to

    everything

    being exposed and modifiable. I remember a comp.lang.forth response from

    Elizabeth Rather of Forth, Inc. to someone who disliked Forth's

    postfix syntax:

    "Why don't you just change it then?"

    --

    Don Groves

    "Computers are like Old Testament gods; lots of rules and no mercy."

    -- Joseph Campbell