i think this is a good approach, but almost everyone who has tried it has gotten bogged down in the usual problems with forth, where you get distracted by writing clever code instead of writing fairly boring, straightforward code that gets the job done in a dumb way. and where things fail in difficult-to-debug ways, so you spend a lot of time debugging. virgil dupras's duskos is the only candidate for an exception to this rule. hopefully you will write a second one!
I see. I would keep the Forth code to a minimum necessary to implement simple things, with an emphasis on things being understandable and hence auditable. Smart code is good; clever, bad.
Comments
i think this is a good approach, but almost everyone who has tried it has gotten bogged down in the usual problems with forth, where you get distracted by writing clever code instead of writing fairly boring, straightforward code that gets the job done in a dumb way. and where things fail in difficult-to-debug ways, so you spend a lot of time debugging. virgil dupras's duskos is the only candidate for an exception to this rule. hopefully you will write a second one!
I see. I would keep the Forth code to a minimum necessary to implement simple things, with an emphasis on things being understandable and hence auditable. Smart code is good; clever, bad.
easier said than done; i look forward to seeing your code ;)