Mark Probert wrote:
> One of the parts of Forth that I really like is the ability to extend
the
> language in arbitrary ways.  So, if you want to add syntax into the
language,
> then you are free to do so, and it is still Forth.  So, there are
guys out
> there that have added OOP and Functional extensions to Forth, there
is a
> parser-generator (Anton Ertl's 'Gray'), a version of Lisp, in-fix
extensions,
> and so on.
>
> You could argue that every Forth program is an extension into a
> domain-specific language.  But I wouldn't be so bold as to do that in
this
> forum ;-)
>
> As a bit of fun, I once embedded a Forth system (ATLAST) into Ruby.
It is
> kind of fun to extend Ruby that way, though a little heretical.

That was you!? Ah, I've read the write-up and I've even downloaded and
installed ATLAST, but I haven't been able to play with it much.
Nonetheless....

I have always had this great love of Forth (despite my only slight use
of it), but I've always felt that it was to cryptic. Recently I've been
toying with a number of language notions, just to see what might come
of it. And I've been starting to feel as if I might actually be able to
get something "realish" together in the not too distant future. And
Forth plays an important role in this. If you're interested I will be
musing over these things on suby-muse (*note not same as suby-ruby). If
you'd like to join-in or just watch, you can subscribe here:
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/suby-muse

T.