Sam Trenholme wrote on Thu, Nov 27, 2008 06:00 PM UTC:
Just glancing at Axiom real briefly, one issue is that it uses a stack-based language (Forth). I don't think it makes much sense to use a stack based language these days except for ultra-embedded applications like robotics and what not. I have never really tried learning a stack based language; I mean I do get reverse polish notation, but it just doesn't feel right to me.
I think the issue is that a stack-based language is what a linguist calls an 'Object Subject Verb' (OSV) language, which are extremely rare in human languages. Languages are usually 'Subject Verb Object' (SVO) languages (English; Spanish; 'a = 2' in programming languages), which is what most programming languages use. Function calls emulate the form of 'Verb Subject Object' (VSO, such as Irish; 'f(a,2)' in programming languages) languages, however, as it turns out.
So, yeah, I think Axiom might get more users if it used a more common language than Forth.
- Sam
Edit: Looking at it a little more, it's nice to finally see a Zillions implementation of Tanbo, which Axiom made possible. I don't see any Chess variants, however.
I think the issue is that a stack-based language is what a linguist calls an 'Object Subject Verb' (OSV) language, which are extremely rare in human languages. Languages are usually 'Subject Verb Object' (SVO) languages (English; Spanish; 'a = 2' in programming languages), which is what most programming languages use. Function calls emulate the form of 'Verb Subject Object' (VSO, such as Irish; 'f(a,2)' in programming languages) languages, however, as it turns out.
So, yeah, I think Axiom might get more users if it used a more common language than Forth.
- Sam
Edit: Looking at it a little more, it's nice to finally see a Zillions implementation of Tanbo, which Axiom made possible. I don't see any Chess variants, however.