Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #23175 > unrolled thread
| Started by | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-06-04 18:14 +0000 |
| Last post | 2013-07-22 09:47 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 169 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-04 18:14 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-04 11:28 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-06 15:37 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-06 13:49 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2013-06-07 12:32 +1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-07 14:36 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-07 08:39 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-07 17:04 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-07 11:19 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-06-07 17:24 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-07 23:04 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-11 14:59 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-06-11 16:09 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-12 08:08 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-06-12 13:52 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-12 14:17 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-13 08:24 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-12 14:18 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-06-12 15:05 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-13 01:40 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-13 08:55 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-06-12 21:05 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-13 10:49 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-13 08:55 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-13 14:33 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-13 13:14 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-06-13 18:33 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-06-14 01:25 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-15 12:00 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-06-15 14:35 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-15 19:29 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-06-17 03:31 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-17 19:16 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-15 11:58 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-11 18:32 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-11 10:33 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2013-06-11 20:42 +0100
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-12 00:20 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-06-12 01:29 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-12 19:52 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-12 14:19 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-13 08:47 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-13 07:45 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-13 13:04 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-14 21:32 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-17 17:15 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-20 09:42 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-06-19 21:52 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-16 10:01 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-16 14:14 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-16 23:58 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-16 23:17 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-17 16:00 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2013-06-17 08:05 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-17 19:33 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Gerry Jackson <spam@qlikz.org> - 2013-06-17 21:23 +0100
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-12 22:58 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-06-12 20:48 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-15 12:05 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-13 10:39 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-11 18:44 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-12 15:16 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-15 12:54 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-06-15 11:05 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-15 14:21 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-15 23:06 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-15 14:56 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-16 00:33 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-15 16:47 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-16 09:45 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-17 16:19 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-06-17 11:51 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-18 00:31 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-18 00:33 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-18 00:46 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-18 04:11 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-18 23:51 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-19 04:32 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-19 02:42 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-19 12:08 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-19 09:25 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-19 19:10 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-20 17:08 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-19 09:04 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-19 09:26 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-07 16:45 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-06-06 23:29 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-07 14:41 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-06-07 17:24 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-07 23:07 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-08 01:26 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-07 17:54 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-19 10:01 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-08 07:29 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge mhx@iae.nl - 2013-06-07 23:17 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge mhx@iae.nl - 2013-06-08 01:30 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-07 23:41 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-08 09:35 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-08 14:28 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-08 21:22 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-19 10:06 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-19 12:27 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-19 10:44 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-07-05 07:41 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-05 14:45 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-05 09:58 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 02:06 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-11 18:36 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 17:36 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-12 07:59 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-12 11:23 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2013-07-12 21:10 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-13 06:19 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2013-06-08 21:55 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-06-11 14:09 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-08 07:49 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-08 07:47 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-08 00:59 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-06-08 16:40 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-13 01:24 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-06-07 00:37 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-06-07 00:53 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-07 14:49 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-06-11 14:13 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-12 14:21 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2013-06-15 23:22 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-06-15 21:26 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-06-16 12:58 -0700
OT Making fun of gavino. was Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-06-19 10:52 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Carsten Strotmann <cas@strotmann.de> - 2013-07-11 22:38 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-11 14:08 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 01:53 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2013-07-11 23:49 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 12:24 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Hannu Vuolasaho <hannu.vuolasaho@nospam.tut.fi.invalid> - 2013-07-12 12:29 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 01:42 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-11 19:42 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 02:56 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-11 20:16 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-12 03:14 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-12 00:35 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-12 04:02 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-07-12 09:08 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-13 06:16 -0400
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-12 03:02 -0500
yourforth : progress report albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-08-01 11:00 +0000
Re: yourforth : progress report "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2013-08-01 08:13 -0400
Re: yourforth : progress report m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2013-08-01 07:22 -0700
Re: yourforth : progress report albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-08-01 19:20 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-07-12 06:10 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 12:37 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-07-12 12:56 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 13:55 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-07-12 14:22 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> - 2013-07-12 14:30 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-12 11:12 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 19:01 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-12 23:05 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-18 19:38 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2013-07-12 00:10 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-12 16:55 +0000
jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-18 19:18 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-18 11:18 -1000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-18 23:23 +0200
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-07-19 00:47 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-07-19 00:54 -0700
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-07-19 09:50 +0000
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-19 05:24 -0500
Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-07-22 09:47 +0000
Page 6 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-19 10:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51c1829b$0$6079$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #23336 |
In article <85fvws2yrp.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>, Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: >Anton Ertl writes: >> I think the intent is to provide a standard Forth that uses the same >> pedagogical approach as JonesForth. > >Oh, never min dthen. > >> But if you think that the secret is just in the extensiveness of the >> comments, a way to prove that would be to do what you suggest > >I read through Jonesforth some time ago, and thought it was quite >pleasant. I found myself quite willing to overlook the various >idiosyncrasities. So no, I'm not particularly intersted in this >challenge. > >However: TELL instead of TYPE, what's up with that? TYPE is actually a terrible ambiguous choice. If you look up the word in the Dragon book (about compilers) you will not see the Forth meaning, even in mentionning. Am I the only one who has krept sufficiently deep in Jones' mindset to immediately see this? Groetjes Albert -- 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]
| From | Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-19 12:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <85vc5av1ib.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> |
| In reply to | #23791 |
albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes: > > However: TELL instead of TYPE, what's up with that? > TYPE is actually a terrible ambiguous choice. If you look up the > word in the Dragon book (about compilers) you will not see the Forth > meaning, even in mentionning. I'm not so much questioning the choise of word. If there were no previous history, TELL would be fine with me. I'm wondering, why replace this archetypical Forth word at all? (I guess you provided a possible answer.) Is there any other Forth using TELL? As to why "TYPE", according to "Forth - The Early Years" the word was introduced around 1965. I those times there were things like teletypes, so I would speculate it made a lot of sense then.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-19 10:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51c18b7f$0$6068$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #23793 |
In article <85vc5av1ib.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>, Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: >albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes: >> > However: TELL instead of TYPE, what's up with that? >> TYPE is actually a terrible ambiguous choice. If you look up the >> word in the Dragon book (about compilers) you will not see the Forth >> meaning, even in mentionning. > >I'm not so much questioning the choise of word. If there were no >previous history, TELL would be fine with me. I'm wondering, why >replace this archetypical Forth word at all? (I guess you provided a >possible answer.) Is there any other Forth using TELL? > >As to why "TYPE", according to "Forth - The Early Years" the word was >introduced around 1965. I those times there were things like >teletypes, so I would speculate it made a lot of sense then. You explain why I want to redo the Jones effort based on ISO. I'm going to leave out DO .. LOOP for pedogagical reasons, but I just can't change the name of TYPE. A much more serious problem is that he is not using proper Forth flags. Groetjes Albert -- 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]
| From | Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-05 07:41 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <85siztlg15.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> |
| In reply to | #23794 |
Albert van der Horst wrote: > You explain why I want to redo the Jones effort based on ISO. I'm > going to leave out DO .. LOOP for pedogagical reasons But it wouldn't really be a Standard Forth then, would it? > > I have seen plenty of different file endings for Forth source > > code, but I haven't seen .fas before. > As you will notice on closer examination it is no forth source but > fasm source. Oh, sorry. > > Is your return stack large too? > > : (words) ?dup if dup >lfa @ recurse id. then ; > > : words context @ (words) ; > > The MS-DOS version could have problems. I have some euler problems > where stacks can grow to Megabytes, so I now have the habit to keep > data on the data stack. Are you saying that your return stack is significantly smaller than the data stack? In my mind, with some >R 2>R N>R going on in a program, the stacks could plausibly require about the same amount of memory. Highly application-specific, of course.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-05 14:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51d6dc17$0$3183$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #24167 |
In article <85siztlg15.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>, Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: >Albert van der Horst wrote: >> You explain why I want to redo the Jones effort based on ISO. I'm >> going to leave out DO .. LOOP for pedogagical reasons > >But it wouldn't really be a Standard Forth then, would it? > >> > I have seen plenty of different file endings for Forth source >> > code, but I haven't seen .fas before. >> As you will notice on closer examination it is no forth source but >> fasm source. > >Oh, sorry. > >> > Is your return stack large too? >> > : (words) ?dup if dup >lfa @ recurse id. then ; >> > : words context @ (words) ; >> >> The MS-DOS version could have problems. I have some euler problems >> where stacks can grow to Megabytes, so I now have the habit to keep >> data on the data stack. > >Are you saying that your return stack is significantly smaller than >the data stack? In my mind, with some >R 2>R N>R going on in a >program, the stacks could plausibly require about the same amount of >memory. Highly application-specific, of course. Too lazy to fire up an MS-DOS machine but here is the difference on my AMD-64: OK DSP@ HERE - . 4195220216 OK RSP@ TIB @ - . 49136 OK I guess that is substantially smaller. I can do a million deep Stern Brocot tree on that kind of data stack. Groetjes Albert -- 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]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-05 09:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <uaudnS8kOOK1QkvMnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #24167 |
Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: > Albert van der Horst wrote: >> You explain why I want to redo the Jones effort based on ISO. I'm >> going to leave out DO .. LOOP for pedogagical reasons > > But it wouldn't really be a Standard Forth then, would it? > >> > I have seen plenty of different file endings for Forth source >> > code, but I haven't seen .fas before. >> As you will notice on closer examination it is no forth source but >> fasm source. > > Oh, sorry. > >> > Is your return stack large too? >> > : (words) ?dup if dup >lfa @ recurse id. then ; >> > : words context @ (words) ; >> >> The MS-DOS version could have problems. I have some euler problems >> where stacks can grow to Megabytes, so I now have the habit to keep >> data on the data stack. > > Are you saying that your return stack is significantly smaller than > the data stack? In my mind, with some >R 2>R N>R going on in a > program, the stacks could plausibly require about the same amount of > memory. Highly application-specific, of course. It's certainly common in a memory-constrained Forth to have the return stack much smaller than the data stack; AFAIAA embedded Forth, Inc. systems since the dawn of time were all this way. In Albert's case I just can't see the point of the recursion: the data stack does exactly what you need. In general, Forth doesn't need explicit recursion for for recursive algorithms. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-12 02:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51df64bd$0$6341$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #24167 |
In article <85siztlg15.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>, Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: >Albert van der Horst wrote: >> You explain why I want to redo the Jones effort based on ISO. I'm >> going to leave out DO .. LOOP for pedogagical reasons > >But it wouldn't really be a Standard Forth then, would it? True. Formally it could have it as a loadable extension. But there is no merit to including an explanation of the legalize in the standard that allows to loop over signed and unsigned numbers using the same mechanism, and the pitfall in the micro optimisation that DO always execute once. Let alone explaining how to implement that with an audience of novice in mind. So a loadable extension would be an undocumented copy of say ciforth's stuff with the purpose to be able to run more of the available iso programs. > <SNIP> Groetjes Albert -- 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]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-11 18:36 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <NoydnfOnfPNxGkLMnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #24412 |
On 7/11/13 4:06 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <85siztlg15.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>, > Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: >> Albert van der Horst wrote: >>> You explain why I want to redo the Jones effort based on ISO. I'm >>> going to leave out DO .. LOOP for pedogagical reasons >> >> But it wouldn't really be a Standard Forth then, would it? > > True. Formally it could have it as a loadable extension. But there is > no merit to including an explanation of the legalize in the standard > that allows to loop over signed and unsigned numbers using the same > mechanism, and the pitfall in the micro optimisation that DO always > execute once. Let alone explaining how to implement that with an > audience of novice in mind. > > So a loadable extension would be an undocumented copy of say ciforth's > stuff with the purpose to be able to run more of the available > iso programs. The concept of asking someone new to Forth to implement a Forth from scratch even with a guide is rather like asking someone to build a car in order to learn how to drive, but whatever... Why is it better to provide one somewhat difficult facility as a loadable extension and not others? What are you doing about CREATE ... DOES> ? And why is it a "micro optimization" that DO always executes once? That reasoning is perfectly straightforward: the test for exiting it is at the end. If you want the test at the beginning, use BEGIN ... WHILE ... REPEAT. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-12 17:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51e03eb7$0$585$e4fe514c@dreader34.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #24416 |
In article <NoydnfOnfPNxGkLMnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@supernews.com>, Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote: >On 7/11/13 4:06 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote: >> In article <85siztlg15.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>, >> Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: >>> Albert van der Horst wrote: >>>> You explain why I want to redo the Jones effort based on ISO. I'm >>>> going to leave out DO .. LOOP for pedogagical reasons >>> >>> But it wouldn't really be a Standard Forth then, would it? >> >> True. Formally it could have it as a loadable extension. But there is >> no merit to including an explanation of the legalize in the standard >> that allows to loop over signed and unsigned numbers using the same >> mechanism, and the pitfall in the micro optimisation that DO always >> execute once. Let alone explaining how to implement that with an >> audience of novice in mind. >> >> So a loadable extension would be an undocumented copy of say ciforth's >> stuff with the purpose to be able to run more of the available >> iso programs. > >The concept of asking someone new to Forth to implement a Forth from >scratch even with a guide is rather like asking someone to build a car >in order to learn how to drive, but whatever... That is the wrong analogy. We are not talking about people who want to drive, but who want to know how a car works. We provide them with a cart, something that can be disassembled and reassembled without getting dangerous on the road. We are also not giving them an assignment to build the cart from scratch, but provide them with a simple cart. Then we ask them to make small tweaks to convince themselves to have mastered the technology. We don't ask them to extend the cart with facilities that would allow it on the road with a license plate. Instead we advise them to purchase a Porsche at FORTH Inc. ;-) > >Why is it better to provide one somewhat difficult facility as a >loadable extension and not others? What are you doing about CREATE ... >DOES> ? I will go to great lengths to provide the student with some insight in CREATE DOES> because it is at the heart of the power of Forth. I've much less strong feelings about DO LOOP, in fact I find it inelegant and hate it. > >And why is it a "micro optimization" that DO always executes once? That >reasoning is perfectly straightforward: the test for exiting it is at >the end. If you want the test at the beginning, use BEGIN ... WHILE ... >REPEAT. Some one not looking inside the implementation would expect DO to have the behaviour of ?DO. Really, I'm pretty sure of that. But you set me thinking. The solution could be to restrict yourforth to `` ?DO LOOP I '' working on signed numbers only. Those who later work with a 16-bit embedded system processor are in a position to understand the merits of `` 7000 C000 DO .. LOOP '' > >Cheers, >Elizabeth Groetjes Albert -- 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]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-12 07:59 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <-Pydnewrdol63n3MnZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #24443 |
On 7/12/13 7:36 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <NoydnfOnfPNxGkLMnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@supernews.com>, > Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote: ... >> And why is it a "micro optimization" that DO always executes once? That >> reasoning is perfectly straightforward: the test for exiting it is at >> the end. If you want the test at the beginning, use BEGIN ... WHILE ... >> REPEAT. > > Some one not looking inside the implementation would expect DO to have > the behaviour of ?DO. Really, I'm pretty sure of that. > But you set me thinking. The solution could be to restrict yourforth to > `` ?DO LOOP I '' working on signed numbers only. > Those who later work with a 16-bit embedded system processor are in a > position to understand the merits of `` 7000 C000 DO .. LOOP '' Having taught many, many Forth beginners over the years, I can honestly say I have never encountered one who expected DO to exit the loop. Why would anyone confuse DO with ?DO, since they have different names? I always teach DO first, and then point out ?DO as a safety mechanism for situations in which the arguments might be even. The situations in which ?DO is appropriate are actually the minority in my experience with applications. The most common situation is when you're saying something like ... SIZE 0 DO ... where SIZE is obviously a non-zero constant (and I say "obviously" because the person writing this loop is probably also the person who defined SIZE). Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-12 11:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7xtxjz4oy5.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #24446 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: > I have never encountered one who expected DO to exit the > loop. Why would anyone confuse DO with ?DO, I remember getting confused by this.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-12 21:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1fvpkscamm85q.1we1q2hgbs8l0.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #24447 |
Op Fri, 12 Jul 2013 11:23:46 -0700 schreef Paul Rubin: > "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> I have never encountered one who expected DO to exit the >> loop. Why would anyone confuse DO with ?DO, > > I remember getting confused by this. I never was, ?DO did come later, round about in 1983. -- Coos CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-13 06:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <krr9dm$i4k$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #24443 |
"Albert van der Horst" <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote in message news:51e03eb7$0$585$e4fe514c@dreader34.news.xs4all.nl... > I will go to great lengths to provide the student with some > insight in CREATE DOES> because it is at the heart of > the power of Forth. I've much less strong feelings about > DO LOOP, in fact I find it inelegant and hate it. > Everyone _says_ that. But, is it *really* true? What I see is that CREATE .. DOES> is hardly used. You can search comp.lang.forth and net.lang.forth for it or <BUILDS .. DOES>. Yes, there are a few thousand references, but very few actual uses of it in code. You can search code on Taygeta and Forth.org. Same thing. You can search the code base of numerous Forths. Ditto. If it's so great, wouldn't it be frequently used? Personally, I strongly believe people avoid it's use, intentionally or unknowingly. It's not so easy to apply it to a solution. It's a bit like trying to use calculus to compute your change when you can simply subtract. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-08 21:55 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <85bo7g2x83.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> |
| In reply to | #23323 |
> I think the intent is to provide a standard Forth that uses the same > pedagogical approach as JonesForth. JonesForth was criticised because > it just implements some words with standard names and non-standard > meaning, which is probably very confusing when people switch from > JonesForth to a standard Forth. Mission accomplished? "I've already modified Jonesforth (v45) to be ANS-compliant at the CORE level (including CREATE...DOES>). My version fully passes the Hayes CORE tests, the COREPLUS tests and those CORE EXT tests that are relevant (i.e. for words that are implemented)." http://www.rtr.myzen.co.uk/bb4wforth.zip
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Richards <billrich@gmx.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-11 14:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kp7b2a$us6$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #23338 |
On 2013-06-08, Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: >> I think the intent is to provide a standard Forth that uses the same >> pedagogical approach as JonesForth. JonesForth was criticised because >> it just implements some words with standard names and non-standard >> meaning, which is probably very confusing when people switch from >> JonesForth to a standard Forth. > > Mission accomplished? > > "I've already modified Jonesforth (v45) to be ANS-compliant at the > CORE level (including CREATE...DOES>). My version fully passes the > Hayes CORE tests, the COREPLUS tests and those CORE EXT tests that are > relevant (i.e. for words that are implemented)." > > http://www.rtr.myzen.co.uk/bb4wforth.zip I was going to say yeah! but then I see you have to fork over 50 bucks to buy bbc basic for windows if the site that sells it ever comes back online. Seems like it would have been a neat project but why oh why did you do that on a system that requires people to pay money and only runs on Windows? Bill
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-08 07:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51b2e224$0$26869$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #23309 |
In article <85vc5p2msh.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>, Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote: >Bernd Paysan wrote: >> The idea of JonesForth (or the JonesForth approach) as a teaching >> tool is the bottom-up idea. You start where your audiance is, which >> is much more likely x86 assembler than Forth. And then you build up >> knowledge; slowly. >> >> A Forth system that lifts itself has a bootstrap problem; but that >> can be overcome by using another Forth for a start. However, a >> Forth system that lifts itself has a teaching bootstrap problem. > >Then how about this: > >1. Start by cleaning up Jonesforth. Bad idea. jonesforth is a toy and you can't base serious production work on it, even after cleaning up. >2. Add an assembler. Explain the beauty of Forth assemblers. >3. Add a metacompiler. This could be a mind-warping lesson. >4. Rebuild itself; now self-hosting. Groetjes Albert -- 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]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-08 07:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51b2e198$0$26869$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #23303 |
In article <kotq7j$ai4$1@online.de>, Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: >Albert van der Horst wrote: > >> In article <kotir2$9j1$1@speranza.aioe.org>, >> Rod Pemberton <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> wrote: >>> >>>Perhaps, you should indicate what exactly you thought was >>>"stupid". >>> >>>You should already know you need 30 to 55 code words or >>>'primitives' for a useable Forth-in-Forth, but can get by with >>>fewer. The rest can be written in Forth. >> >> That is stupid: thinking that it is easier to understand or >> 'simpler' because it contains less assembler words. > >The idea of JonesForth (or the JonesForth approach) as a teaching tool is >the bottom-up idea. You start where your audiance is, which is much more >likely x86 assembler than Forth. And then you build up knowledge; slowly. >First, how the primitives work. And then how high-level Forth works. How >it works, and what it does; for the "how it works", the assembler notation >is helpful. > >A Forth system that lifts itself has a bootstrap problem; but that can be >overcome by using another Forth for a start. However, a Forth system that >lifts itself has a teaching bootstrap problem. Which is why there was the >commented figForth listing and "Inside F83". This has been said before, but seldomly so clear. > >-- >Bernd Paysan >"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" >http://bernd-paysan.de/ > -- 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]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-08 00:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7x8v2lxcbi.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #23315 |
albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes: >>A Forth system that lifts itself has a bootstrap problem; but that can be >>overcome by using another Forth for a start. However, a Forth system that >>lifts itself has a teaching bootstrap problem. Which is why there was the >>commented figForth listing and "Inside F83". > This has been said before, but seldomly so clear. Inside F83 was a great book but I thought it was mostly about F83's OS-like features, which were pretty cool. I always wonder what it was like to see F83 in actual use. I might try it myself sometime, if I can set up or emulate suitable hardware. I think the clarity of Jonesforth and F83 came from their extensive comments, and not because they were in assembler. There's a style of Forth programming that really avoids comments, and that's kind of unhelpful. A metacompiled Forth with enough comments would IMHO be more readable than something that used a lot of assembly code and boostrapped from zero. Jonesforth did contorted things because it didn't have a full Forth available in its early stages..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-08 16:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <DNmdnTlNsrolOS7MnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #23316 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > I think the clarity of Jonesforth and F83 came from their extensive > comments, and not because they were in assembler. There's a style of > Forth programming that really avoids comments, and that's kind of > unhelpful. A metacompiled Forth with enough comments would IMHO be more > readable than something that used a lot of assembly code and boostrapped > from zero. Jonesforth did contorted things because it didn't have a > full Forth available in its early stages.. I think so. I remember a few years back when I added DOES> to jonesforth, and it was a real PITA to do because there was no way to test anything written in assembler without rebuilding the whole system. It was also hard to figure out where stuff was supposed to go, and you had to build dictionary enties explicitly. Argh! Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-13 01:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <51b91f48$0$6339$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #23316 |
In article <7x8v2lxcbi.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: >albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes: >>>A Forth system that lifts itself has a bootstrap problem; but that can be >>>overcome by using another Forth for a start. However, a Forth system that >>>lifts itself has a teaching bootstrap problem. Which is why there was the >>>commented figForth listing and "Inside F83". >> This has been said before, but seldomly so clear. > >Inside F83 was a great book but I thought it was mostly about F83's >OS-like features, which were pretty cool. I always wonder what it was >like to see F83 in actual use. I might try it myself sometime, if I can >set up or emulate suitable hardware. > >I think the clarity of Jonesforth and F83 came from their extensive >comments, and not because they were in assembler. There's a style of >Forth programming that really avoids comments, and that's kind of >unhelpful. A metacompiled Forth with enough comments would IMHO be more >readable than something that used a lot of assembly code and boostrapped >from zero. Jonesforth did contorted things because it didn't have a >full Forth available in its early stages.. May I add to this? The contorted things result from doing it himself and starting from scratch. There is a bright side to this. All steps into gaining insight in a Forth compiler are present as he recorded them on the way. Groetjes Albert -- 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]
Page 6 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web