jonesforth VS sectorforth

Cool. Here are some other resources that I've encountered along the way of learning Forth:

- JonesForth: https://github.com/nornagon/jonesforth/blob/master/jonesfort...

This is legit a text that goes the an x86 Forth implementation. Actually, it's just an implementation with really extensive comments. That said, including whitespace and comments, it's just 2000 lines and the pedagogy is excellent. Highly recommended for anyone who would rather see behind the curtain before picking up a larger text.

- SmithForth: https://dacvs.neocities.org/SF/

So, Smith decided to hand-write a Forth directly in x86-64 opcodes (well, the corresponding ascii hex bytes). It's incredibly slim and enlightening how you can bootstrap a language in just a couple hundred bytes or so.

This project actually inspired me to really learn the x86-64 architecture, so I ended up hand-decompiling the SmithForth binary instead of going through his commented implementation. Hand-decompilation is an absolutely fascinating exercise. You learn all about ELF structure, opcode encodings, and actually start to see the gaps where microarchitectural details shine through. Highly recommended for any hacker that really wants to grok low level details.

- Mecrisp: https://mecrisp.sourceforge.net/

An amazingly fast Forth implementation for MSP430, ARM, RISC-V, MIPS, and some FPGAs. This gave me one really nice understanding of Forth as

    A REPL into your hardware!

I've git-cloned JonesFORTH (https://github.com/nornagon/jonesforth/blob/master/jonesforth.S) and achieved to compile it (i.e. run make w/o an error. When I start the executable, it presents me with an empty line, and when I say BYE, it says PARSE ERROR: bye.

Is there any particular language you're looking for? I've found some languages hideous until I understood them and could appreciate their respective graces. Off the top of my head the I can think of a couple.

The first is Jones Forth (https://github.com/nornagon/jonesforth), start with jonesforth.S and move into jonesforth.f. I really enjoyed following along with it and trying my hand at making my own stack based language.

The other is Xv6, a teaching operating system from MIT (https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/6.828/2021/xv6.html), not all the code or implementations are top notch but it shows you non-optimized versions (just because they're simple and more readable) of different concepts used in OS design.

If you're interested in the embedded world, there is a really neat project I've been following that feels a more structured and safe (as in fault-tolerant) while still staying pretty simple (both conceptually and in the code itself): Hubris and Humility (https://hubris.oxide.computer/).

Very low hardware requirements, so basic industrial control at the level where you'd otherwise use an Arduino or so but on scavenged hardware. Forth is ridiculously simple to get an implementation running.

https://github.com/nornagon/jonesforth/blob/master/jonesfort...

Is a nice starting point. It's obviously not as compact as say 'Brainfuck' but it is far more versatile.

OP mentioned jonesforth, but linked to a nasm port of it. Which is probably good it’s just that the documentation in the comments with ascii art doesn’t look right on my screen. So here’s a more common repo: https://github.com/nornagon/jonesforth

Rip the asm macros for the basic FORTH words out of this and then embed them in a C binary, statically linked with your favourite libs for whatever task. Although I haven't tried this yet, I'm planning on doing it with ncurses for my own Roguelike. From there, if you can convert the function calls and your parameters down to raw numbers, you can send instructions to ncurses or whatever other API you like, directly from a FORTH stack.

or the mirror of this site in github: https://github.com/nornagon/jonesforth

> I'm not sure here how you differentiate minimalist from restrictive.

The flexibility of the language and its syntax. The more constructs are syntactic, the less minimalistic it is, and Go is a very syntactic language.

> I've always considered Go to be minimalist in terms of available tokens to the programmer: https://github.com/e3b0c442/keywords/blob/main/chart.png

No language on this chart has even a passing resemblance to minimalistic. I don't think anything does when it reaches double digit keywords.

For reference, I believe Smalltalk has 6.

And forth is more complicated because it doesn't really have keywords at all, and barely any syntax, instead it has assembly-coded / runtime-provided words (~functions) and variables. SectorForth (https://github.com/cesarblum/sectorforth/) is down to 8 builtin words, 2 IO words, and 5 variables (milliforth packs those behind a word instead). And so far 2 of the words have been found unnecessary / redundant.

https://github.com/cesarblum/sectorforth/issues

Probably well known, but I'll let it here anyway: SectorForth

sectorforth

If you want to go allll the way down to the metal, you could put https://github.com/cesarblum/sectorforth in a floppy boot sector and then work your way up from there, enabling line A20 and switching into 32-bit protected mode yourself. Certainly on the "DIY" end of the spectrum, but it sure would be satisfying.

Forth - More powerful and minimal than C, can fit in 512 bytes