Re: Suitability of Lua as a First Programming Language?

[David Kastrup <dak@...>]

Enrico Colombini <erix@erix.it> writes:

> Stephen Kellett wrote:
>> Forth was abandoned because it was too hard to use. 
>
> I'd correct that to "hard to learn and get used to".
> Lua has a very smooth access ramp. Forth hasn't.

I disagree here.  Leo Brodie's "Starting Forth" is one of the best
beginner's instructions to programming I know, and Forth's interactivity
and straightforward "syntax" make it also easy to get footed.

> I didn't use Forth in practice, but I know people who did with good
> results. I guess it's just a question of habit, convenience and
> discipline, as with any language.

Forth is the only language I know that has a smaller memory footprint
than handwritten assembly language.  That, coupled with its
interactivity and its capability to run split-host (compile to target,
interpret on host) make it quite a good choice for developing for
absolute minimal systems like microcontrollers with on-chip memory.

-- 
David Kastrup