Hi Henry: do you work in the heath system? If you have any pointers I'd be interested to read about your work and how you use things like Forth (or maybe someday, Racket! :) in that work.
Best, Robby On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Henry Lenzi <henry.le...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Daniel -- > > Do you mean the Forth files? > I don't belienve they would make much sense to you, but it would go > something like this (as you can see, that is a FORTH definition): > > : NAME S"John Doe" > CU4 > HCTZ25 30P 1CPM > OMZ20 30P 1CPM INSTOMZ > SIMVA20 30P 1CPN > L\D ; > > Expands to (NOTE: Some things are germane to our public health > system, such as renewing "continuous use" gratis medications, recipe > valid for 4 months): > > John Doe > > Continuous use - 4 months > > Hydrochlorothiazide 25mg ---------------- 30 pills > > Take 1 pill P.O. in the morning. > > Omeprazol 20mg ----------------------------- 30 pills > > Take 1 pill P.O. in the morning, 1/2 hour > before breakfast. > > Simvastatin 20mg ---------------------------- 30 pills > > Take 1 pill P.O. at night. > > City, xx/xx/xxxx > > > So what´s happening here is that inside the FORTH definition, > everything delimited by ":" and ";" is a FORTH word, as they say, that > is to say, valid FORTH code. > The very cheap trick here is simply writing a file with plain text > (but called .fth, .f or other FORTH designations for filetypes) > begining with a ":", ending with a ";", and everything in between, > which are the FORTH words. > The FORTH reader than opens this file. As soon as it hits the ":", it > recognizes it's FORTH code. It's all amazingly stupid. However, what > you get is: a DSL hassle-free (no parsing/lexing), a flat-file > database for free (the name of the files), an interpreter (comes with > the territory). And code is data, data is code, in a very, very > concrete way. > > > Cheers, > > Henry Lenzi > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Daniel Prager > <daniel.a.pra...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Henry >> >> Racket is very suitable for writing DSLs, or even whole Ls (more advanced!). >> As you'd expect, the idioms for DSL construction in straight Racket are >> different from those in Forth and will take a bit of familiarization and >> adjustment. >> >> Would you be willing to share a more fully-fledged example of a shorthand >> medical recipe (input) and reconstructed recipe (output) so that the Racket >> Community can better understand what sounds like a very worthwhile project? >> >> >> Dan >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 6:21 AM, Henry Lenzi <henry.le...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Of course, the ultimate purpose would be to re-evaluate the imported >>> symbol and reconstruct a medical recipe. The purpose of these >>> baby-steps exercises is porting a medical recipe program I've written >>> originally in Forth that allowed me to service 5.000 patients creating >>> a little database of shorthand recipes that then expand into real >>> medical recipes. I got hundreds of patients on renewable recipes for, >>> say, hypertension. Hand writing is no fun. Typing them in Word is no >>> fun. The hospital has is its own software, but it's is a load of >>> baloney, extremely buggy, if you ask me, so I'm rolling my own again, >>> except I want to print directly on the model paper our service uses, >>> so I want graphics like Racket Scheme has (very good capabilities, as >>> far as my needs are concerned). >>> >>> With Forth, it's very easy to design DSLs, because there's no syntax >>> and you get a lot of advanced features for free. For instance, there's >>> no need to write a parser for my little language. However, since Forth >>> implementations fall short of dealing with images, graphics (unless >>> you take the royal road to pain and learn to program for the Win32 API >>> and how it works for a particular Forth vendor), I'm looking at Racket >>> Scheme. > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
