[dwarman]

Forgive me, but I recall, with some decades of practice, a major point in FORTH is that one constructs a vocabulary and syntax specifically for solving the problem at hand. Compiler primitives are just as first class as regular word (aka function) definitions, including how to compile itself as well as what to do when executed (DOES> keyword, which can itself be redefined). FORTH may have a clunky and primitive reputation, but it seems to me it qualifies as a programmable programming language.

[skrishnamurthi]

Sure. But the degree of clunkiness matters. Forth doesn't have the ability to build linguistic _abstractions_ the way Racket does. But if you want to add Forth to the evidence of the paper's thesis, that's fine, more the better.