Wow! I read &#x2F;u&#x2F;thefinder&#x27;s account of the lisp machine. What a find.<p>&gt; Forth as a programming style is the definitive predecessor of the DSL, so I see no benefit in using it for standardization.<p>Yup. I believe that standardization-of-language exists because we&#x27;re illiterate. My analogy is writing. Any literate person who&#x27;s been writing for a couple of decades can begin with a blank page and end with a bespoke piece-of-writing that accomplishes the intended goal. Areas of writing where normally-literate people are illiterate are law and programming. In those areas normal people rely on standards and scribes to do the work for them, even if normal people can casually read those writings.<p>My loose prediction for the future of programming--say 200 years out--is Forth. Start with a blank page, end with a DSL that accomplishes one thing. Everyone will do it, because they&#x27;ll grow up in a culture that uses it.<p>The quality you mentioned: everything-is-right-there-ness, to me mirrors the skilled writer using everything to accomplish something.<p>Again, I&#x27;m being loose. Above, I called it a belief.