Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #12393 > unrolled thread

Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent? And, C style operators.

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailntt.cmm> - 2012-05-22 16:01 -0400
    Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent? And, C style operators. Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-22 14:58 -0700
    Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-05-23 13:19 +1000
      Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-22 23:44 -0700
        Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-05-23 12:30 +0200
          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-23 08:37 -0700
            Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-23 23:32 -0700
              Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-05-24 13:24 +0000
                Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-24 09:40 -0700
                  Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-05-24 20:52 +0000
                    Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-24 14:17 -0700
                      Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-05-25 08:10 +0000
                        Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-25 01:50 -0700
                          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201205.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-05-25 22:39 +0200
                          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-26 22:02 -0700
                        Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-05-25 14:33 +0200
                          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-05-25 16:50 +0000
                            Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-05-25 20:30 +0000
                              Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. hwfwguy@gmail.com - 2012-05-30 11:23 -0700
                          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Peter Knaggs" <pjk@bcs.org.uk> - 2012-05-29 20:00 +0100
        Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailntt.cmm> - 2012-05-24 07:39 -0400
          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-05-24 15:37 +0000
    Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-22 21:18 -1000
      Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-24 18:27 -1000
        Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailntt.cmm> - 2012-05-25 03:55 -0400
          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-25 07:38 -1000
            Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailntt.cmm> - 2012-05-25 15:17 -0400
              Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-25 10:05 -1000
                Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailntt.cmm> - 2012-05-26 08:02 -0400
                  Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-05-26 14:31 +0200
                  Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-05-26 09:55 -0400
                  Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent? And, C style operators. BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-05-26 07:04 -0700
                  Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-26 09:41 -1000
                    Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailntt.cmm> - 2012-05-26 19:52 -0400
                      Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-26 19:49 -1000
                        Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-06-01 13:39 +1000
                          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-31 19:27 -1000
                        Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailntt.cmm> - 2012-06-01 18:24 -0400
                          Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-06-02 03:09 -0500
                      Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-05-27 02:23 -0500
                    Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Harry Vaderchi" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2012-05-27 11:54 +0100
                      Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent?  And, C style operators. "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-27 07:25 -1000
                      Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent? And, C style operators. Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-05-27 11:13 -0700

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#12393 — Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent? And, C style operators.

Is the use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent in Forth?

It just seems like if they were used much at all, that there would be some
words that made using them a bit easier.  But, Forth seems to be devoid of
most words that I'd guess would be available to use on VARIABLEs.  IMO, C's
assignment operators would help.  Other than the ancient fig-Forth TOGGLE
and SMUDGE, ISTM, that only +! (plus-store) is available.

Perhaps, something like so, in Forth syntax, with C name as a comment:

: AND! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ AND R> ! ; \  C's &=
: OR! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ OR R> ! ; \  C's |=
: XOR! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ XOR R> ! ; \  C's ^=

: +! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ + R> ! ; \  C's +=
: -! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ - R> ! ; \  C's -=
: *! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ * R> ! ; \  C's *=

: /! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP / SWAP ! ; \  C's /=
: MOD! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP MOD SWAP ! \  C's %=
: LSHIFT! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP LSHIFT SWAP ! ; \  C's <<=
: RSHIFT! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP RSHIFT SWAP ! ; \  C's >>=

I'd assume the "DUP >R @ <op> R> !" and "SWAP OVER @ SWAP <op> SWAP !"
sequences could be implemented as generic wrapper words that could be passed
an XT or ' (ticked) word which then get EXECUTEd.

Well, at a minimum, they might help someone converting C to Forth ...


Rod Pemberton

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#12396 — Re: Use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent? And, C style operators.

On May 22, 9:01 pm, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@notemailntt.cmm>
wrote:
> Is the use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent in Forth?
>
> It just seems like if they were used much at all, that there would be some
> words that made using them a bit easier.  But, Forth seems to be devoid of
> most words that I'd guess would be available to use on VARIABLEs.  IMO, C's
> assignment operators would help.  Other than the ancient fig-Forth TOGGLE
> and SMUDGE, ISTM, that only +! (plus-store) is available.
>
> Perhaps, something like so, in Forth syntax, with C name as a comment:
>
> : AND! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ AND R> ! ; \  C's &=
> : OR! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ OR R> ! ; \  C's |=
> : XOR! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ XOR R> ! ; \  C's ^=
>
> : +! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ + R> ! ; \  C's +=
> : -! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ - R> ! ; \  C's -=
> : *! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ * R> ! ; \  C's *=
>
> : /! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP / SWAP ! ; \  C's /=
> : MOD! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP MOD SWAP ! \  C's %=
> : LSHIFT! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP LSHIFT SWAP ! ; \  C's <<=
> : RSHIFT! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP RSHIFT SWAP ! ; \  C's >>=
>
> I'd assume the "DUP >R @ <op> R> !" and "SWAP OVER @ SWAP <op> SWAP !"
> sequences could be implemented as generic wrapper words that could be passed
> an XT or ' (ticked) word which then get EXECUTEd.
>
> Well, at a minimum, they might help someone converting C to Forth ...
>
> Rod Pemberton

I think you've unwittingly demonstrated why the words you cite aren't
included in the language: its trivial to define them yourself! This
isn't really possible in C but trivial in Forth. In forth you just
write what you need!


I personally know of no other language that is so malleable. I'm told
lisp has similar features but I've never tried it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12399

Rod Pemberton wrote:
> Is the use of VARIABLEs frequent or infrequent in Forth?

Less frequent than in other languages because Forth uses the stack
for passing parameters.  That's not to say VARIABLE's are not required
or undesirable in Forth.

> It just seems like if they were used much at all, that there would be some
> words that made using them a bit easier.  But, Forth seems to be devoid of
> most words that I'd guess would be available to use on VARIABLEs.  IMO, C's
> assignment operators would help.  Other than the ancient fig-Forth TOGGLE
> and SMUDGE, ISTM, that only +! (plus-store) is available.
>
> Perhaps, something like so, in Forth syntax, with C name as a comment:
>
> : AND! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ AND R> ! ; \  C's &=
> : OR! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ OR R> ! ; \  C's |=
> : XOR! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ XOR R> ! ; \  C's ^=
>
> : +! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ + R> ! ; \  C's +=
> : -! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ - R> ! ; \  C's -=
> : *! ( x addr -- ) DUP >R @ * R> ! ; \  C's *=
>
> : /! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP / SWAP ! ; \  C's /=
> : MOD! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP MOD SWAP ! \  C's %=
> : LSHIFT! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP LSHIFT SWAP ! ; \  C's <<=
> : RSHIFT! ( x addr -- ) SWAP OVER @ SWAP RSHIFT SWAP ! ; \  C's >>=
>
> I'd assume the "DUP >R @ <op> R> !" and "SWAP OVER @ SWAP <op> SWAP !"
> sequences could be implemented as generic wrapper words that could be passed
> an XT or ' (ticked) word which then get EXECUTEd.
>
> Well, at a minimum, they might help someone converting C to Forth ...

The downside is having to learn a new set of operators.

IIRC there is or was a C-to-Forth translator available somewhere.  I would
imagine however most do it manually.  Having forth locals can be handy
for the preliminary stages after which they can be weeded out.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12400

"Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> writes:
> IIRC there is or was a C-to-Forth translator available somewhere.  I would
> imagine however most do it manually.  Having forth locals can be handy
> for the preliminary stages after which they can be weeded out.

You might be thinking of Philip Koopman's GCC back end that produces
Forth (see his book "Stack Machines").  In fact it turns out the locals
can't really in general be weeded out.  Part of the art of Forth
programming seems to be resolving (some of) the difficult cases by
high-level factoring that a compiler can't really do.  The ability and
willingness to do that is one of the things I find impressive about
Forth programmers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12403

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> writes:
> > IIRC there is or was a C-to-Forth translator available somewhere.  I would
> > imagine however most do it manually.  Having forth locals can be handy
> > for the preliminary stages after which they can be weeded out.
> 
> You might be thinking of Philip Koopman's GCC back end that produces
> Forth (see his book "Stack Machines").  In fact it turns out the locals
> can't really in general be weeded out.  Part of the art of Forth
> programming seems to be resolving (some of) the difficult cases by
> high-level factoring that a compiler can't really do.  The ability and
> willingness to do that is one of the things I find impressive about
> Forth programmers.

I seem to remember one being available on MPE's site?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12405

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> writes:
> I seem to remember one being available on MPE's site?

Interesting.  http://www.mpeforth.com/arena.htm :

    These are for projects we think would be useful, are too busy or too
    mean to do ourselves, or are outside our current skill set e.g. too
    theoretical or academic. ...

    C to Forth Compiler: This is a complete C to Forth compiler with
    sources. It is an MPE research project which we believe will grow
    better as a Forth community project. Download the ZIP file
    c2forth110.zip which is about 510kb.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12416

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>     C to Forth Compiler: This is a complete C to Forth compiler with
>     sources. It is an MPE research project which we believe will grow
>     better as a Forth community project. Download the ZIP file
>     c2forth110.zip which is about 510kb.

OK, I downloaded this and played with it.  I had to fix a couple of
errors and clean up the makefile to get this to build, but yeah, it's a
quite compact C compiler that produces Forth code.  

The output is nothing at all like idiomatic Forth, and relies heavily on
a "lv," time word that appears to mean something like PICK.  That about
the same thing as locals, in my opinion.  Still, it's nice work and it
would be cool if MPE were to dust it off a little and release it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12419

On Wed, 23 May 2012 23:32:10 -0700, Paul Rubin
<no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>>     C to Forth Compiler: This is a complete C to Forth compiler with
>>     sources. It is an MPE research project which we believe will grow
>>     better as a Forth community project. Download the ZIP file
>>     c2forth110.zip which is about 510kb.
>
>OK, I downloaded this and played with it.  I had to fix a couple of
>errors and clean up the makefile to get this to build, but yeah, it's a
>quite compact C compiler that produces Forth code.  
>
>The output is nothing at all like idiomatic Forth, and relies heavily on
>a "lv," time word that appears to mean something like PICK.  That about
>the same thing as locals, in my opinion.  Still, it's nice work and it
>would be cool if MPE were to dust it off a little and release it.

It would be really cool if we got some feeback in the form of those
"dusted off" make files and bugs that you have fixed. The we might
even release v1.2.

Stephen

-- 
Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com
MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691
web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12421

stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) writes:
> It would be really cool if we got some feeback in the form of those
> "dusted off" make files and bugs that you have fixed. The we might
> even release v1.2.

I just hacked the files enough to get it to compile.  I didn't do any
real dusting.  As I remember:

1) changed makefiles to use unix filenames instead of msdos.  Changed
spaces to tabs which are syntactically significant in makefiles.
Changed "cl" (name of whatever C compiler you were using) to "cc".

2) There was some problem with "memmove" function so I chopped it out
since there is a library one.

3) symbols "emit" and "gen" were declared static in fthcode.c and
shadowed globals of the same name declared in a .h file that fthcode.c
also imported, so I patched that.

That was enough to get the files to compile so I could fool around with
them a little.  There were still a lot of compile-time warning messages
that I didn't try to fix.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12425

On Thu, 24 May 2012 09:40:51 -0700, Paul Rubin
<no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) writes:
>> It would be really cool if we got some feeback in the form of those
>> "dusted off" make files and bugs that you have fixed. The we might
>> even release v1.2.
>
>I just hacked the files enough to get it to compile.  I didn't do any
>real dusting.  As I remember:
...

I ask for feedback and get hand-waving ... grump, grump, grump.

It would be really cool if Open Source people could make proper
error reports. Or is that someone else's problem?

Stephen

-- 
Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com
MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691
web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12426

stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) writes:
> I ask for feedback and get hand-waving ... grump, grump, grump.
>
> It would be really cool if Open Source people could make proper
> error reports. Or is that someone else's problem?

Well, do you have a bug tracker?  A git repo that you can pull my
changes to?  Anything like that?

Really, what I did wasn't rocket science.  I unpacked the files, typed
"make" in the subdirs, got a bunch of error messages causing the build
to fail, so I poked stuff til the build was successful (though there
were still a lot of warning messages).  That meant updating the
makefiles and making a couple of small hacks in the source files as I
said.

I can put up a tarball or a git repo of my hacked version if you want,
but I figured it was enough to just generally describe what I did, since
you can presumably do the same thing in a minute or two, if you have a
Un*x system.  The patch I made to fix the gen/emit conflict was not
really an acceptable one for releasable code (I just #ifdef'd out the
global declaration for the file having the conflict), so you probably
want to handle that in a different way anyway.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12445

On Thu, 24 May 2012 14:17:20 -0700, Paul Rubin
<no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>Really, what I did wasn't rocket science.

Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge. One of the
peculiarities of MPE is that *all* code changes are reviewed by
human eyeballs and BeyondCompare *before* being let in.

Stephen

-- 
Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com
MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691
web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12446

stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) writes:
> Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge.

OK, I'll email them or post a tarball url in the next day or so.
Merging isn't appropriate since I basically changed the DOS-specific
makefiles turning them into unix-specific ones.  Maybe you can include
both versions.  The code changes I made probably also won't be
acceptable as-is, but they'll at least indicate what went wrong.

> One of the peculiarities of MPE is that *all* code changes are
> reviewed by human eyeballs and BeyondCompare *before* being let in.

Sure, though of course one normally does similar things with git (using
"git diff").

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12461

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) writes:
> > Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge.

Thank you Stephen, Paul, I see the most value in this as being able to
generate test cases by the zillions since there is so much C code
available. 

> Sure, though of course one normally does similar things with git (using
> "git diff").

Git is not that great unless you're submitting Linux kernel patches. There
are quite a few source control systems around, you know.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12489

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
> stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) writes:
>> Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge.
> OK, I'll email them or post a tarball url in the next day or so.

The changed files are here:

   http://nightsong.com/phr/forth/c2fpatch.zip

Note that I unpacked your archive with "unzip -L -a" which
converted the filenames to lowercase and removed CR's from
ends of lines (DOS to Unix conversion) before making those changes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12449

> Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge. One of the
> peculiarities of MPE is that *all* code changes are reviewed by
> human eyeballs and BeyondCompare *before* being let in.

man diff

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12453

On Fri, 25 May 2012 14:33:49 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>> Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge. One of the
>> peculiarities of MPE is that *all* code changes are reviewed by
>> human eyeballs and BeyondCompare *before* being let in.
>
>man diff

Oh, come on - get some real tools! Eyeballs are great!

Stephen
P.S. It's really hot here and I'm off to the garden for a
decent glass of wine. I may be some time ...


-- 
Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com
MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691
web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12459

In article <4fbfb7c5.899199637@192.168.0.50>,
Stephen Pelc <stephenXXX@INVALID.mpeforth.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 May 2012 14:33:49 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
><nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>>> Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge. One of the
>>> peculiarities of MPE is that *all* code changes are reviewed by
>>> human eyeballs and BeyondCompare *before* being let in.
>>
>>man diff
>
>Oh, come on - get some real tools! Eyeballs are great!

What is he trying to imply? That it makes sense to run a diff or
use BeyondCompare, then have nobody look at the results?

>
>Stephen
>P.S. It's really hot here and I'm off to the garden for a
>decent glass of wine. I may be some time ...

It was over 30 degrees (303 K) last wednesday, here in the Netherlands.

>
>
>--
>Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com
>MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time
>133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
>tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691
>web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads


--
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12620

On Friday, May 25, 2012 1:30:07 PM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article <4fbfb7c5.899199637@192.168.0.50>,
> Stephen Pelc <stephenXXX@INVALID.mpeforth.com> wrote:
> >On Fri, 25 May 2012 14:33:49 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
> ><nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge. One of the
> >>> peculiarities of MPE is that *all* code changes are reviewed by
> >>> human eyeballs and BeyondCompare *before* being let in.
> >>
> >>man diff
> >
> >Oh, come on - get some real tools! Eyeballs are great!
> 
> What is he trying to imply? That it makes sense to run a diff or
> use BeyondCompare, then have nobody look at the results?
> 
> >
> >Stephen
> >P.S. It's really hot here and I'm off to the garden for a
> >decent glass of wine. I may be some time ...
> 
> It was over 30 degrees (303 K) last wednesday, here in the Netherlands.
> 

Sounds comfy. It gets up to 50C where I live (Phoenix), but not very often. That used to shut down the airport, until the FAA updated their calibration tables to cover the range beyond 120F.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12564

On Fri, 25 May 2012 13:33:49 +0100, Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>> Just send me the changed files and I'll do the merge. One of the
>> peculiarities of MPE is that *all* code changes are reviewed by
>> human eyeballs and BeyondCompare *before* being let in.
>
> man diff
>

It more like:

man kompare

-- 
Peter Knaggs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web