From owner-freebsd-small Wed Oct 7 04:22:18 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA04639 for freebsd-small-outgoing; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:22:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from fan.net.au (fan.net.au [203.20.92.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id EAA04629 for ; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 04:22:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hannama@fan.net.au) Received: from andrewh.famzon.com.au (dialup-nas1-54.bris.fan.net.au [202.179.224.55]) by fan.net.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id VAA06511; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:21:22 +1000 (EST) From: "Andrew Hannam" To: "Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai" , "Christopher G. Petrilli" Cc: "FreeBSD Small" Subject: RE: Command-line i/f Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:19:36 +1000 Message-ID: <000101bdf1e4$5e0279e0$0104010a@andrewh.famzon.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Sender: owner-freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > >> Not necessarily... Quite a few mortals know how to code > Forth. I have > >> enjoyed a fair amount of success over the years introducing > Forth to new > >> programmers. > > > >This is really not a valid argument. Quite a few mortals know x86 > >assembler, but that hardly makes it attractive I think the > >reality is that RPN is totally foreign to most people, at least those > >who don't keep a traditional HP calculator by their sides. > > Heh, depends on what it will be used for... It is small though ;) With all this discussion on Forth, I ask myself why people are looking for alternatives to the most common script language/command line (/bin/sh). The obvious answer is size but yet it was not so long ago that I remember seeing versions of sh below the 10K mark in size (albiet 16 bit versions). What happenned ? - Job control, command line completion and all sorts of other very nice features. Has anyone looked back into history to find a far more minimal version of the shell that is more suitable to PicoBSD's requirements ? Whilst writing 32 bit code may cause larger binaries - we have the advantages of shared libraries to help reduce it again. Anyone know of such an implementation with appropriate source licenses? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message