A well written and well known piece by Forths creator and I find myself in agreement with him perhaps because I share his bias for the language and its powerful simplicity,even though modern computer languages such as Python etc have supplanted it in academic use leaving Forth as a language used largely in embedded/automated systems.
Speaking as a Forth dabbler on the Raspberry Pi and a ZX81 fitted with a Forth ROM I have to say that the ability to create powerful routines from simple words that run at a reasonable speed and have those same routines occupy a relatively small footprint is something I find very attractive.
The downside for myself and ,I suspect, a few others is that there are just too many dialects of what's supposed to be a common language in the wild, imagine if you will how ridiculous it would be having 10 different versions of Z80 assembler each incompatible with the other.
Find your dialect then stick with it is my advice.
I have some superb maths routines written in Gforth for the Pi but have more chance of becoming the next Pope than translating them to run on the ZX81.
For the ZX81 I use the British adaptation of the US created Pluri-Forth known as H4th seeing as it has an editor and comes with an instruction manual and has 32bit and some 64 bit functionality. There are a couple of other Forths available one being too slow to be useful and the other has no editor or instruction manual and cannot decide whether it's Fig or Camel Forth and lacks a lot of the Forth primitives of either dialect and the only program examples included with it although pretty decent are Jupiter Ace conversions written mostly in z80 assembler which rather negates the point of Forth programming I would have thought.
Also the lack of any graphical sophistication is something lacking in Forth which I suspect is off-putting to those whose main interest is game creation/playing rather than computing, otherwise Forth can be an interesting and diverting pastime.
Just my 2 cents worth as they say.
