Comments on: future developments? OS X, Cocoa and Forth /2011/10/17/osx-cocoa-forth/ interactive, semi-autonomous technological artifact, musical automaton, machine musician and improviser Thu, 18 Apr 2013 05:45:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: Han-earl Park /2011/10/17/osx-cocoa-forth/comment-page-1/#comment-768 Thu, 18 Apr 2013 05:45:02 +0000 /?p=1729#comment-768 In reply to Arthur.

Thanks for reading, and for your comment.

Yes, iMops is a pretty impressive piece with a fascinating history (talking of NEON-derrived Forth-SmallTalk hybrids, I wonder what ever happened to Yerk). My current plans, tentatively, is to move away from high-level languages (if Forth-variants could ever be described as high-level). I’ve been fascinated by the possibility of constructions that exist significantly in the physical domain—carrying out computations mechanically—with some simple analog, and, if necessary, microcontroller, components.

…but that’s still early days, and early dreams.

Thanks again for reading.

]]> By: Arthur /2011/10/17/osx-cocoa-forth/comment-page-1/#comment-767 Wed, 17 Apr 2013 07:11:07 +0000 /?p=1729#comment-767 In principle, iMops should be a lot closer to what you are used to. Like HMSL, the OO paradigm in iMops is heavily inspired by Neon. It is also free, open source, and is maturing rather quickly in spite of it being the effort of just a single individual. Nao is also a terrific guy to work with, and would undoubtedly respond well to bugs you might find in iMops. I know this is an old post, but I figured I’d comment anyway since I did not see anything on your site regarding your decision on this matter. Good luck to you!

]]>