# The False language

## John Cowan — 2003-02-24 15:45:27

    False seems to be a small subset of Joy, developed independently.

    Home page: http://wouter.fov120.com/false

    Online docs: http://wouter.fov120.com/false/false.txt

    --

    Híggledy-pìggledy / XML programmers     John Cowan

    Try to escape those / I-eighteen-N woes;        http://www.ccil.org/~cowan

    Incontrovertibly / What we need more of is      http://www.reutershealth.com

    Unicode weenies and / François Yergeaus.        jcowan@...

## phimvt@lurac.latrobe.edu.au — 2003-02-26 04:05:42

    On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, John Cowan wrote:

     > False seems to be a small subset of Joy, developed independently.

    >

    > Home page: http://wouter.fov120.com/false

    > Online docs: http://wouter.fov120.com/false/false.txt

     Thanks for that.

    Fascinating, even if it inscrutable, largely because of the

    restriction that each symbol has to be a single character.

    What is truly amazing, though, is that the compiler fits

    into 1K of memory. (Back in the days of DEC's PDP10 there used

    to be a simple Basic-like language called Focal. Its claim

    to glory was that the interpreter fitted into 2K - this meant

    that it could run without ever being swapped out, and that

    was useful for some systems programming, so I was told.)

    Is anybody studying the implementation details of the False language?

      - Manfred

## John Cowan — 2003-02-26 04:21:17

    phimvt@... scripsit:

     > Fascinating, even if it inscrutable, largely because of the

    > restriction that each symbol has to be a single character.

    >

    > What is truly amazing, though, is that the compiler fits

    > into 1K of memory.

     Those two facts evidently go together.

     > (Back in the days of DEC's PDP10 there used

    > to be a simple Basic-like language called Focal. Its claim

    > to glory was that the interpreter fitted into 2K - this meant

    > that it could run without ever being swapped out, and that

    > was useful for some systems programming, so I was told.)

     I used to hack Focal on the PDP-8, where it ran in 4K of 12-bit words

    standalone, or 8K with the OS/8 interface -- that part was developed

    by Jim van Zee of the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry.

    It too had single-letter commands, although multiple letters were legal

    (and ignored):  S for Set, F for For, D for Do, etc. etc.

    --

    John Cowan           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan@...

    To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all.  There

    are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language

    that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.

            --_The Hobbit_

## wtanksleyjr@cox.net — 2003-02-26 05:01:24

    From: phimvt@...

     >On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, John Cowan wrote:

    >>False seems to be a small subset of Joy,

    >>developed independently.

    >>Home page: http://wouter.fov120.com/false

    >>Online docs: http://wouter.fov120.com/false/false.txt

    >Fascinating, even if it inscrutable, largely because

    >of the restriction that each symbol has to be a

    >single character.

     Although that is a bad restriction, I find the language

    reasonably readable. There are very few symbols, and

    the shortness actually makes it quicker to read through

    the definitions.

    I'd be amused by a version of it which got rid of its

    pick operator (and all the other non-ASCII chars) and

    instead provided either dip or direct access to the

    return stack.

    I may be finding it easier to read because I spent so

    much time learning J and K, though. Those are cool

    languages, and False has a lot of their "feel", even

    though they're essentially applicative (but very

    different from other applicative languages).

     >  - Manfred

     -Billy