A Forth-inspired language for writing websites
71 points - today at 3:00 PM
Source> Something like this:
> : h1 ( s -- ) "<h1>" emit . "</h1>" emit ;
> "Hello, World!" h1
So, what’s the difference between . and emit? It seems both take a string and output it to the HTML of the page. If so I don’t see why that couldn’t be
: h1 ( s -- ) "<h1>" . . "</h1>" . ;
We also have:
"2026-05-21T14:00:00Z" "May 21, 2026" dt-published
where, I think, the idea is to always have the two strings consistent with each other. If so, why require the blog writer to do that conversion?
There's no docs or implementation, but I'd say that `.` in Forth is a generic way to print something, and `emit` may do more work, like HTML escaping.
LLM-based coding is enabling so much! The crazy weekend project now can have compilation to native code and web assembly, allow server-side or client-side rendering, manage multiple types of persistence, include adaptive compression, and do all of this without breaking a sweat.
It's scary but I love it.
coliveira
today at 4:12 PM
For all its worth this could just be an AI generated blog post. There is no code, no repository, no link to any use.
killerstorm
today at 4:26 PM
And yet people keep using React, relying on a fractal pattern of kludges.
React (and the unidirectional FRP approach in general) is the only known sane way to describe complex GUIs. It's the same approach that powers spreadsheet calculations.
Most websites are not complex GUIs though, and do not need React.
PaulHoule
today at 4:47 PM
This post isn't offering anything better.
Gagarin1917
today at 5:59 PM
[dead]
WorldMaker
today at 3:51 PM
> I like how weird it is. I might use it for my site, who knows?
If there's a place to use a weird and fun language it is certainly one's own personal blog. Sounds like a great opportunity, I think you should do it.
rohitsriram
today at 4:48 PM
[flagged]