Draco18s wrote:
> In article <utmdnaJHLZqAGF3anZ2dnUVZ8vidnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> s.r.clarkstone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>> Draco18s wrote:
>>> I did for a while too, again, ****s and giggles. Though I think I
lacked some
>>> of the more powerful scripting language, I was pretty much religated
to MUCK
>>> commands and piping, rather than having full access to Fourth (or
whatever it
>>> was called... *quick google search later* Ah, MUF: Multi User Forth, I
was
>>> almost right!)
>> Ooohh, Forth. MU*s are usually based around OO languages. Was MUF
just
>> OO in disguise, or was it a proper Forth, with immdiate words, direct
>> memory access, etc? I notice it has first-class strings, which is a
>> sign for the former.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUF_%28programming_language%29
>
> No idea.
It seems not be be a real Forth. There is no way to make words
immediate, no CREATE or DOES>, no ALLOT (though there are arrays), no
vectoring or even function pointers, and almost certainly no arbitrary
pointers. OTOH, it is probably good enough for the situation it is used
for.
BTW, the objects in the MUCK are OO-type objects.
--
Simon Richard Clarkstone:
s?m?n_cl?rkst?n?@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"August 9 - I just made my signature file. Its only 6 pages long.
I will have to work on it some more." -- _Diary of an AOL User_
|
