Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #3564 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-06-26 15:13 -0500 |
| Last post | 2011-07-02 17:52 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 324 — 44 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-06-26 15:13 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-06-27 16:13 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse vandys@vsta.org - 2011-06-27 15:50 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-06-27 16:55 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse vandys@vsta.org - 2011-06-27 17:23 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-06-27 20:09 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-06-29 18:59 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-30 12:49 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-02 16:38 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-07-03 11:27 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-03 17:40 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-04 18:38 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-06-30 12:25 -0700
Forth OO ( was: Re: The Lisp Curse ) Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2011-07-12 09:43 -0400
Re: Forth OO ( was: Re: The Lisp Curse ) Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2011-07-12 12:35 -0400
Re: Forth OO ( was: Re: The Lisp Curse ) John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-13 10:02 -0700
Re: Forth OO ( was: Re: The Lisp Curse ) Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 08:32 -0400
Re: Forth OO ( was: Re: The Lisp Curse ) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-14 07:10 -0700
Re: Forth OO ( was: Re: The Lisp Curse ) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-14 09:31 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse arc@vorsicht-bissig.de - 2011-07-12 22:20 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-13 10:01 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-28 03:02 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-06-27 21:29 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-28 06:55 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-06-28 06:17 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-06-28 14:14 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-06-30 16:08 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-01 16:01 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-07-01 13:41 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-04 21:18 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-05 02:26 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-02 16:56 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-02 08:28 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-02 17:00 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-03 10:20 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-04 20:57 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-06 15:45 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-06 16:19 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2011-07-07 01:23 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2011-07-06 21:44 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-06 19:01 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2011-07-07 10:39 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 13:07 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2011-07-06 21:42 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-07 10:32 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse marko <marko@marko.marko.marko> - 2011-07-07 22:09 +1000
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-07 09:19 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-07 14:08 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-08 10:33 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-08 05:31 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-08 17:47 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse vandys@vsta.org - 2011-07-08 17:23 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Spam@ControlQ.com - 2011-07-08 15:34 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-08 21:04 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-08 10:34 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-08 21:28 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-09 15:25 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-10 10:14 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-10 22:02 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-11 03:18 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-11 12:42 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-07-12 19:42 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-12 14:42 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-11 07:01 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-11 07:24 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-11 20:40 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2011-07-11 21:24 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-12 18:54 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2011-07-12 20:45 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-13 00:28 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-13 10:25 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-11 19:55 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-11 13:41 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <forthfreak@forthfiles.net> - 2011-07-11 13:45 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Jan Coombs <jan_2011-02@murray-microft.co.uk> - 2011-07-12 21:51 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-09 16:49 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-11 04:27 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-07 14:53 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-28 11:57 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-29 21:54 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Julian Fondren <ayrnieu@gmail.com> - 2011-07-30 18:22 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-01 12:59 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Julian Fondren <ayrnieu@gmail.com> - 2011-08-02 00:07 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-01 22:58 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-08 20:44 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2011-07-31 10:25 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-08 16:00 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2011-08-10 07:08 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-10 18:01 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-11 03:05 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-11 07:37 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-08-11 10:07 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-11 08:32 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-11 08:37 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-11 18:25 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-12 01:37 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-12 07:15 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-12 08:02 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-11 08:13 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-11 18:50 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-12 01:39 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse arc <arc@vorsicht-bissig.de> - 2011-08-11 10:06 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-11 08:02 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse arc <arc@vorsicht-bissig.de> - 2011-08-12 11:49 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse arc <arc@vorsicht-bissig.de> - 2011-08-12 13:18 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-08-12 18:49 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 12:52 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-14 09:54 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-08-14 12:53 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-14 13:21 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-08-14 15:09 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-15 04:52 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-15 03:46 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2011-08-15 12:15 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-08-15 20:51 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2011-08-15 21:56 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse "Jeff M." <massung@gmail.com> - 2011-08-15 19:50 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-16 03:07 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-08-18 23:45 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse arc <arc@vorsicht-bissig.de> - 2011-08-18 11:38 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2011-08-18 07:57 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-08-15 06:01 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-16 05:10 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-16 03:13 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-08-18 23:31 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-19 06:09 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-20 17:14 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Jeff M." <massung@gmail.com> - 2011-08-20 20:38 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Jeff M." <massung@gmail.com> - 2011-08-20 20:49 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-20 23:39 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Jeff M." <massung@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 00:29 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-21 00:57 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-21 01:04 -0700
Hamming numbers (was: The Lisp Curse) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-22 16:12 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201108.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-08-21 13:21 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-21 10:40 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-21 13:56 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-21 12:33 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-21 12:42 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-21 13:30 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-22 12:49 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-23 10:20 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-23 20:15 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-21 13:41 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-22 11:48 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-22 10:36 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-22 22:57 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-22 23:28 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-23 04:16 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-08-23 08:29 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-08-23 14:59 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-23 20:12 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-23 20:09 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse vandys@vsta.org - 2011-08-22 16:54 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2011-08-23 10:48 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-08-23 11:41 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse vandys@vsta.org - 2011-08-23 17:11 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-08-23 12:27 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Brad <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2011-08-23 10:07 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2011-08-23 13:02 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse vandys@vsta.org - 2011-08-23 20:30 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-21 13:49 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse George Hubert <georgeahubert@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-22 01:49 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse vandys@vsta.org - 2011-08-22 17:02 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2011-08-22 07:50 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-23 01:03 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2011-08-22 22:38 -1000
Hamming numbers (was: The Lisp Curse) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-22 15:10 +0000
Re: Hamming numbers Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-23 00:09 -0700
Re: Hamming numbers anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-23 13:09 +0000
Re: Hamming numbers Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-23 10:41 -0700
Re: Hamming numbers anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-23 17:58 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse vandys@vsta.org - 2011-08-19 17:41 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-19 18:05 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-08-19 13:53 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2011-08-19 13:15 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-19 15:39 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-19 19:49 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-19 17:41 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-20 03:54 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2011-08-20 15:20 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-21 14:41 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-22 11:47 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse coos haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2011-08-22 20:30 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-22 15:22 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-22 23:34 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-22 22:48 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-08-23 20:07 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2011-08-23 15:44 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-08-20 08:55 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-12 10:49 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-13 14:03 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-14 07:57 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2011-08-12 09:51 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-13 13:45 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2011-08-13 08:08 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-08-14 02:56 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-08-13 04:35 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-08-12 07:53 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-13 14:13 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-13 13:59 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-08-14 14:46 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-17 01:31 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-06-28 03:24 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201106.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-06-28 19:55 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-29 06:30 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-06-29 13:49 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-06-29 14:02 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-29 18:16 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-06-29 15:45 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-29 19:45 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Elko T <nono.black.elko@gmail.com> - 2011-06-29 22:08 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-30 10:07 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse coos haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2011-06-30 20:44 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-30 18:08 -0400
Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Elko T <nono.black.elko@gmail.com> - 2011-06-30 20:07 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Elko T <nono.black.elko@gmail.com> - 2011-06-30 22:12 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-01 16:01 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Elko T <nono.black.elko@gmail.com> - 2011-07-01 17:59 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) The Beez <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2011-07-01 16:33 -0700
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-02 18:37 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2011-07-01 06:07 -0500
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-01 16:00 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-01 14:06 +0000
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Elko T <nono.black.elko@gmail.com> - 2011-07-01 14:57 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-02 16:55 +0000
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-01 16:04 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-02 11:26 -0700
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) coos haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2011-07-02 22:10 +0200
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-02 14:36 -0700
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Elko T <nono.black.elko@gmail.com> - 2011-07-02 21:36 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-02 18:25 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-03 10:53 -0700
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Elko T <nono.black.elko@gmail.com> - 2011-07-04 23:41 -0400
Re: Counted vs. terminated strings (Re: The Lisp Curse) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-05 01:02 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-07-02 22:46 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2011-07-18 01:25 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-06-30 14:44 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-30 23:24 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201107.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-07-03 12:04 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-03 20:24 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-04 02:21 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201107.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-07-04 16:02 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Tarkin <tarkin000@gmail.com> - 2011-07-04 10:21 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-04 11:13 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Tarkin <tarkin000@gmail.com> - 2011-07-04 12:31 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-04 15:01 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-07-04 13:23 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-05 01:45 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-05 11:34 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-05 05:34 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-05 14:28 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-05 09:39 -0700
OT: full virtualization (was: The Lisp Curse) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-07 15:36 +0000
Re: OT: full virtualization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-07 13:17 -0500
Re: OT: full virtualization Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-08 04:53 -0700
Re: OT: full virtualization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-08 17:11 +0000
Re: OT: full virtualization Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-08 12:41 -0700
Re: OT: full virtualization (was: The Lisp Curse) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-08 04:34 -0700
Re: OT: full virtualization (was: The Lisp Curse) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-10 16:03 +0000
Re: OT: full virtualization (was: The Lisp Curse) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-10 13:06 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-07-07 00:11 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-07-06 12:47 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-07 10:07 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Tarkin <tarkin000@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 13:00 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-04 12:40 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-04 11:15 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-04 15:53 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-07-05 10:16 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-05 02:23 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-05 09:54 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-07-05 22:33 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-05 16:28 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-05 16:18 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-04 15:03 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-07-05 00:20 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-05 11:35 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-07-05 09:46 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201107.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-07-05 23:13 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-05 15:31 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2011-07-07 04:38 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-05 19:21 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-07-05 14:57 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-07-05 20:48 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-07-06 07:38 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-06 09:46 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2011-07-07 04:38 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-07 10:41 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-07-07 09:12 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-06 09:53 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-07-06 21:45 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-07 14:48 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 20:20 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse coos haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2011-07-08 04:39 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-07-12 23:22 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-07-12 19:35 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2011-07-13 23:37 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201107.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-07-12 05:10 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-12 03:44 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201107.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-07-13 22:06 +0200
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-14 04:01 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2011-07-07 04:38 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-03 07:34 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Spam@ControlQ.com - 2011-06-29 13:25 -0400
Forth as implementation language vandys@vsta.org - 2011-06-29 18:27 +0000
Re: Forth as implementation language Spam@ControlQ.com - 2011-06-29 17:50 -0400
Re: Forth as implementation language vandys@vsta.org - 2011-06-29 22:45 +0000
Re: Forth as implementation language Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-30 13:04 +0100
Re: Forth as implementation language Spam@ControlQ.com - 2011-06-30 11:42 -0400
Re: Forth as implementation language "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-30 13:12 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-06-29 08:38 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse Spam@ControlQ.com - 2011-06-29 18:01 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-06-29 12:50 -1000
Re: The Lisp Curse stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2011-06-30 08:15 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Spam@ControlQ.com - 2011-07-03 15:22 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-30 13:09 +0100
Re: The Lisp Curse "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-29 18:31 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-06-29 23:01 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-07-01 09:42 -0500
Re: The Lisp Curse Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-07-01 18:49 +0000
Re: The Lisp Curse Mentifex <mentifex@myuw.net> - 2011-06-29 15:41 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse "Fuschia, President-Elect of the Bright Purplish-Green Council" <fp-eotbp-gc@ibm.com> - 2011-06-29 19:16 -0400
Re: The Lisp Curse Mark Wills <forthfreak@forthfiles.net> - 2011-06-30 00:34 -0700
Re: The Lisp Curse anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-07-02 17:52 +0000
Page 16 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 Next page →
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-14 04:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <jYydnRR5B6bqLYPTnZ2dnUVZ_qOdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #4124 |
Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201107.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote: > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote: > >> Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201107.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote: >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > p. 62, section 3.9 Goto's and Labels >> > >> > . >> > Nonetheless, we will suggest a few situations where goto's may find a >> > place. >> >> These misplaced apostrophes are really irritating. Surely they aren't >> in your printed copy: they aren't in mine. > > I quoted the text accurately (you conveniently omitted the citation) > and I cited the book and copyright date from whence it came, to > wit(less): > >> From "The C Programming Language", Brian W. Kernighan * Dennis M. Ritchie >> Copyright 1978, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc. > > Andrew I must point out you have a nasty habit of insinuating > yourself into other people's conversations just for the purpose of > arguing with people concerning things that don't involve you and > that you have no knowledge of. For goodness' sake, if you want to have a private conversation, take it to email. I was quibbling about an apparently incorrect quotation that you made *in public*. > That's very nasty business and I think you should learn some > manners. I must also point out you didn't take issue with anyone > else's English in this thread. I don't complain about anyone else's grammar; I make plenty of mistakes myself. Bad quotations, however, are another matter, because they misrepresent a third party. At least I thought it was a bad quotation, but perhaps those apostrophes really are in your early edition. In which case, thank you for the clarification. > Haven't you been spanked enough lately? Why do you make yourself > such an easy target? Huh? Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-07 04:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <cqidnXdlseA444jTnZ2dnUVZ7tKdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #3811 |
In article <iuvb1t$b78$1@speranza.aioe.org>, do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm (Rod Pemberton) wrote: > I lived through it. You're correct that the "world" didn't start > with the 8080, it all started with the 6502. The 6502 was the first > microprocessor that had the major breakthrough that brought > inexpensive and increasingly faster microprocessor based computing to > the masses: pipelining. From what I can remember Motorolla was fairly late on the micro scene being like Zillog a firm set up by people leaving an existing company. I do have the patience to look up what Texas and other companies produced but Intel started with the 4004, followed up by the 8008 and then the 8080. The first micro computer available to the masses was the Altair which used an 8080. CPM systems became the common business micro and they used the 8080 as well. I do not have the dates for Japanese manufacturers but I believe Tandy ended up with most of the US market for home computing using a Z80. Apple machines were a lot more expensive and did not really take off until Visicalc arrived. By the way while Acorn did use the 6502 the original BBC specification for the BBC computer specified a Z80 and one of the first add on boards for the BBC was a Z80 one. Ken Young
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-03 07:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <7N-dnTSZ85Vv_I3TnZ2dnUVZ7vednZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #3628 |
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote: > > Why? C is successful because it was used to write two major, bad operating > systems. If you want to write code on those systems then you need to use C > because all the header files and system calls are set up for C. Why? Lots of people don't. All you have to do is follow te ABI. > If you look at the IBM mainframe the operating system is written in > assembler. All the header files and system calls are in assembler. MVS? Written in PL/S, surely. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Spam@ControlQ.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 13:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1106291251580.79427@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #3622 |
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > I've never programmed in Forth either. I am implementing an interpreter for > it. At this point, I think one _must_ implement their own version to That is considered anathema here. The Forth nomenclatura would prefer that you purchase or download an eval 'modern' forth, and learn the language prior to *NEVER* implementing your own. *I*, on the other hand agree with you, and I've implemented at least 3 C based Forths over the years. > understand some of the concepts. The fact that the Forth community uses I agree ... by implementing the feature, you at least understand the mechanics, and a knowledge of how to apply it in an application is not a stretch from there. > non-standard language, i.e., non Comp. Sci. language, for everything, > obscures how much of the functionality works. The fact that not much seems > to be well documented as to implementation of Forth does so also. You (or It was not always so. Back in the FIG days, reference implementations were provided for every micro architecture which was popular, and "verbatim" re-implementations based upon prior reference platforms kept Forth relatively static. Subsequent standards work has tended away from implementation details, not only for portability, but also to remove the handcuffs for the avante guarde to innovate ... probably a good thing (TM). My miniforth (a C based implementation) is an attempt to take the classic fig model, and provide a degree of portability. From that base, I'll be adding the platform and language features which will make it a useful production scripting language with a small memory footprint ... for *ME* anyways. I suspect that in the end, I will make no attempt to comply with any standard, except perhaps the base wordset. Good luck with your implementation, and if you have pointers to your work, they would be appreciated ... (as a BoF) ... http://www.ControlQ.com/blob/wordpress/?p=352 Rob Sciuk.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vandys@vsta.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 18:27 +0000 |
| Subject | Forth as implementation language |
| Message-ID | <97193tFsmoU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3635 |
Spam@controlq.com wrote: > My miniforth (a C based implementation) is an attempt to take the classic > fig model, and provide a degree of portability. Do you think Forth is a good language? Or just an easy language to implement? If the former, why aren't you implementing *in* Forth? Even if you had to use some throw-away C code to bootstrap (hell, I used straight assembly code for my own bootstrap of ForthOS), wouldn't you at this point be happily hosted on your own metacompiler? -- Andy Valencia Home page: http://www.vsta.org/andy/ To contact me: http://www.vsta.org/contact/andy.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Spam@ControlQ.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 17:50 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Forth as implementation language |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1106291654510.79427@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #3638 |
Hi, Vandy, On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, vandys@vsta.org wrote: > Date: 29 Jun 2011 18:27:10 GMT > From: vandys@vsta.org > Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth > Subject: Forth as implementation language > > Spam@controlq.com wrote: >> My miniforth (a C based implementation) is an attempt to take the classic >> fig model, and provide a degree of portability. > > Do you think Forth is a good language? Or just an easy language to > implement? Not necessarily, at least not out of the box, but add a few words which pertain to your problem domain, and it becomes a great language. When I took my first undergrad programming course in FORTRAN, the first couple of weeks were spent using a "mini" assembler like interpreter ... just to avoid "big syntax", and to get the basics across. Forth might have been a better choice for teaching undergrads, but this was back in the 70's, and Forth hadn't yet hit the radar screens at the University I attended (though it eventually did, and there was even a Forth Users group headed by Nick Solntseff). The "factoring" techniques historically ascribed to good forth coding are an excellant way to code in any language, and while I have scripted in Tcl, python, bash, awk (and toyed with Ruby, Perl, Rexx etc), I keep coming back to Forth as a "pet" language. I suppose it is a great language, and as Elizabeth made reference a day or so ago, it offers up its internals to the end user ... useful for the low level coder, but very scary to the Erlang, Occam and Haskell types ... > If the former, why aren't you implementing *in* Forth? You know, that's a very good question. What do you think the minimal wordset to bootstrap a hosted Forth consists of? I've been meaning to write an assembler in my C based forth, and bootstrap from there ... time permitting ... but unfortunately, it doesn't -- hence I proceeded *in* C. Once I had the basic forth framework in C, it was arguably simpler/faster to add a bunch of words in C, and so I never analysed what was the minimal subset required to bootstrap a "forth". > Even if you had to use some throw-away C code to bootstrap (hell, I used > straight assembly code for my own bootstrap of ForthOS), wouldn't you at > this point be happily hosted on your own metacompiler? exactly ... and I just might start in assembler for the AVR platform, it being so different from a Von-Neumann architecture. I'd ask what words were required to bootstrap your ForthOS, but as it was a native implementation on x86 "iron", much of the boot code would likely have been in assembler, and the comparison would not have been a fair one ... also, I recall you used some BIOS i/o routines (no?). Still, I regard ForthOS as a remarkable effort ... and all the more notable by the fact that it *was* a native implementation. My miniforth runs "native" on ARM, and Nintendo DS (homebrew) ... and I'm planning to use u-boot to run "native" on an 8core PPC Soc in the near term -- but I've got some i/o words to write first 8-). As for the Hosted version of Miniforth, it runs on Windows, Mac/OSX, Linux, 3 BSD's and on intel 32/64, AMD, Arm, PPC and HP-PA. (Pretty much anything I have a compiler for and access to -- one file, one compile and voila!). Am I a purist? Not by a long shot, but I've got a version of Forth on every single computing device I own -- and I *DO* frequently code in forth. Cheers, Rob Sciuk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vandys@vsta.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 22:45 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Forth as implementation language |
| Message-ID | <971o94Fi1oU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3648 |
Spam@controlq.com wrote: >> If the former, why aren't you implementing *in* Forth? > You know, that's a very good question. It's great to see you open to the concept! > ... also, I recall you used some BIOS i/o routines (no?). No, ForthOS talks directly to the hardware. > Am I a purist? Not by a long shot, but I've got a version of Forth on > every single computing device I own -- and I *DO* frequently code in > forth. You should go ahead and shoot for a metacompiler, IMHO. It'll take your Forth system to another level, if my own experience is any guide. Regards, Andy Valencia Home page: http://www.vsta.org/andy/ To contact me: http://www.vsta.org/contact/andy.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-30 13:04 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Forth as implementation language |
| Message-ID | <8NGdnd_kCpj4-5HTnZ2dnUVZ7r6dnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #3648 |
On 29/06/2011 22:50, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: > > > Hi, Vandy, > > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, vandys@vsta.org wrote: > >> Date: 29 Jun 2011 18:27:10 GMT >> From: vandys@vsta.org >> Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth >> Subject: Forth as implementation language >> >> Spam@controlq.com wrote: >>> My miniforth (a C based implementation) is an attempt to take the >>> classic >>> fig model, and provide a degree of portability. >> >> Do you think Forth is a good language? Or just an easy language to >> implement? > > Not necessarily, at least not out of the box, but add a few words which > pertain to your problem domain, and it becomes a great language. > > When I took my first undergrad programming course in FORTRAN, the first > couple of weeks were spent using a "mini" assembler like interpreter ... > just to avoid "big syntax", and to get the basics across. Forth might > have been a better choice for teaching undergrads, but this was back in > the 70's, and Forth hadn't yet hit the radar screens at the University I > attended (though it eventually did, and there was even a Forth Users > group headed by Nick Solntseff). > > The "factoring" techniques historically ascribed to good forth coding > are an excellant way to code in any language, and while I have scripted > in Tcl, python, bash, awk (and toyed with Ruby, Perl, Rexx etc), I keep > coming back to Forth as a "pet" language. I suppose it is a great > language, and as Elizabeth made reference a day or so ago, it offers up > its internals to the end user ... useful for the low level coder, but > very scary to the Erlang, Occam and Haskell types ... > >> If the former, why aren't you implementing *in* Forth? > > You know, that's a very good question. What do you think the minimal > wordset to bootstrap a hosted Forth consists of? I've been meaning to > write an assembler in my C based forth, and bootstrap from there ... > time permitting ... but unfortunately, it doesn't -- hence I proceeded > *in* C. > > Once I had the basic forth framework in C, it was arguably > simpler/faster to add a bunch of words in C, and so I never analysed > what was the minimal subset required to bootstrap a "forth". > >> Even if you had to use some throw-away C code to bootstrap (hell, I >> used straight assembly code for my own bootstrap of ForthOS), wouldn't >> you at this point be happily hosted on your own metacompiler? > > exactly ... and I just might start in assembler for the AVR platform, it > being so different from a Von-Neumann architecture. > > I'd ask what words were required to bootstrap your ForthOS, but as it > was a native implementation on x86 "iron", much of the boot code would > likely have been in assembler, and the comparison would not have been a > fair one ... also, I recall you used some BIOS i/o routines (no?). > Still, I regard ForthOS as a remarkable effort ... and all the more > notable by the fact that it *was* a native implementation. > > My miniforth runs "native" on ARM, and Nintendo DS (homebrew) ... and > I'm planning to use u-boot to run "native" on an 8core PPC Soc in the > near term -- but I've got some i/o words to write first 8-). As for the > Hosted version of Miniforth, it runs on Windows, Mac/OSX, Linux, 3 BSD's > and on intel 32/64, AMD, Arm, PPC and HP-PA. (Pretty much anything I > have a compiler for and access to -- one file, one compile and voila!). > > Am I a purist? Not by a long shot, but I've got a version of Forth on > every single computing device I own -- and I *DO* frequently code in forth. > > Cheers, > Rob Sciuk Dr. Ting spent a long time evaluating the minimum number of words to bootstrap a Forth. I think it was about 30. That's what eForth was/became IIRC.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Spam@ControlQ.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-30 11:42 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Forth as implementation language |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1106301142150.55224@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #3667 |
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Mark Wills wrote: > Dr. Ting spent a long time evaluating the minimum number of words to > bootstrap a Forth. I think it was about 30. That's what eForth was/became > IIRC. So, which 30? Pointers?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-30 13:12 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Forth as implementation language |
| Message-ID | <iuias9$1r2$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #3671 |
<Spam@ControlQ.com> wrote in message news:alpine.BSF.2.00.1106301142150.55224@yoko.controlq.com... > > On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Mark Wills wrote: > > Dr. Ting spent a long time evaluating the minimum number of words to > > bootstrap a Forth. I think it was about 30. That's what eForth was/became > > IIRC. > > So, which 30? Pointers? > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.forth/msg/10872cb68edcb526 http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.forth/msg/7912fa3634b2bd06 http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.forth/msg/3caa5b2e62f53d7a Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 08:38 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <fq-dnakv5o6r7JbTnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #3635 |
On 6/29/11 7:25 AM, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Rod Pemberton wrote: > >> >> I've never programmed in Forth either. I am implementing an >> interpreter for >> it. At this point, I think one _must_ implement their own version to > > That is considered anathema here. The Forth nomenclatura would prefer > that you purchase or download an eval 'modern' forth, and learn the > language prior to *NEVER* implementing your own. *I*, on the other hand > agree with you, and I've implemented at least 3 C based Forths over the > years. That is so incorrect as to be laughable. Not only is DIY Forth not "anathema" here, a significant number of regular posters have either done their own or are in the process of doing so. My position has been that if you want to implement your own Forth for whatever reason, you should at least *learn* Forth by using an existing modern Forth and developing a working ability using existing books (preferably more modern books than Starting Forth) and tutorials before starting the project. 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 | Spam@ControlQ.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 18:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1106291757030.79427@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #3640 |
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Elizabeth D Rather wrote: > Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:38:44 -1000 > From: Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> > Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth > Subject: Re: The Lisp Curse > > On 6/29/11 7:25 AM, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: >> On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Rod Pemberton wrote: >> >>> >>> I've never programmed in Forth either. I am implementing an >>> interpreter for >>> it. At this point, I think one _must_ implement their own version to >> >> That is considered anathema here. The Forth nomenclatura would prefer >> that you purchase or download an eval 'modern' forth, and learn the >> language prior to *NEVER* implementing your own. *I*, on the other hand >> agree with you, and I've implemented at least 3 C based Forths over the >> years. > > That is so incorrect as to be laughable. Not only is DIY Forth not > "anathema" here, a significant number of regular posters have either done > their own or are in the process of doing so. > What is incorrect? My impression or my position? ;-) > My position has been that if you want to implement your own Forth for > whatever reason, you should at least *learn* Forth by using an existing > modern Forth and developing a working ability using existing books > (preferably more modern books than Starting Forth) and tutorials before > starting the project. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth Is *YOUR* book available for download, Elizabeth? I've found Stephen's to be very helpful, if a little dated ... I would love to re-learn Forth in a more modern language, and then perhaps re-implement my forth yet again 8-). Cheers, Rob Sciuk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 12:50 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <ZdidnUZJQoeyMZbTnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #3649 |
On 6/29/11 12:01 PM, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Elizabeth D Rather wrote: > >> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:38:44 -1000 >> From: Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> >> Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth >> Subject: Re: The Lisp Curse >> >> On 6/29/11 7:25 AM, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: >>> On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Rod Pemberton wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I've never programmed in Forth either. I am implementing an >>>> interpreter for >>>> it. At this point, I think one _must_ implement their own version to >>> >>> That is considered anathema here. The Forth nomenclatura would prefer >>> that you purchase or download an eval 'modern' forth, and learn the >>> language prior to *NEVER* implementing your own. *I*, on the other hand >>> agree with you, and I've implemented at least 3 C based Forths over the >>> years. >> >> That is so incorrect as to be laughable. Not only is DIY Forth not >> "anathema" here, a significant number of regular posters have either >> done their own or are in the process of doing so. >> > > What is incorrect? My impression or my position? ;-) The assertion that DIY Forth is "anathema" on c.l.f. >> My position has been that if you want to implement your own Forth for >> whatever reason, you should at least *learn* Forth by using an >> existing modern Forth and developing a working ability using existing >> books (preferably more modern books than Starting Forth) and tutorials >> before starting the project. >> >> Cheers, >> Elizabeth > > Is *YOUR* book available for download, Elizabeth? I've found Stephen's > to be very helpful, if a little dated ... I would love to re-learn Forth > in a more modern language, and then perhaps re-implement my forth yet > again 8-). The Forth Programmer's Handbook is included with the free evaluation download of SwiftForth. Forth Application Techniques is a relatively inexpensive purchase from Amazon. 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 | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-30 08:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4e0c3041.21143954@192.168.0.50> |
| In reply to | #3649 |
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:01:06 -0400, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: >I've found Stephen's to >be very helpful, if a little dated ... Please send me and email telling me what is dated. Then I can make changes for the next revision. 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]
| From | Spam@ControlQ.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-03 15:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1107031516270.71675@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #3664 |
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Stephen Pelc wrote: > Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:15:12 GMT > From: Stephen Pelc <stephenXXX@mpeforth.com> > Reply-To: stephenXXX@INVALID.mpeforth.com > Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth > Subject: Re: The Lisp Curse > > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:01:06 -0400, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: > >> I've found Stephen's to >> be very helpful, if a little dated ... > > Please send me and email telling me what is dated. Then I can make > changes for the next revision. > > Stephen Stephen , The manual stands on its own, and while it addresses the "historical" forth model, only mentions in passing "modern forth". Frankly, I intended the comment more as kudo than criticism. It has been a boon to the community, and in a significant way, can be pointed to as a starting point for the initiate, or for those coming back to the language. It works also as clarification when certain words or techniques are difficult to understand, particularly for the newbie. Sorry to get your shorts knotted ... Rob.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-30 13:09 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <KNGdnWVThuUK-pHTnZ2dnUVZ8gWdnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #3640 |
On 29/06/2011 19:38, Elizabeth D Rather wrote: > On 6/29/11 7:25 AM, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: >> On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Rod Pemberton wrote: >> >>> >>> I've never programmed in Forth either. I am implementing an >>> interpreter for >>> it. At this point, I think one _must_ implement their own version to >> >> That is considered anathema here. The Forth nomenclatura would prefer >> that you purchase or download an eval 'modern' forth, and learn the >> language prior to *NEVER* implementing your own. *I*, on the other hand >> agree with you, and I've implemented at least 3 C based Forths over the >> years. > > That is so incorrect as to be laughable. Not only is DIY Forth not > "anathema" here, a significant number of regular posters have either > done their own or are in the process of doing so. > > My position has been that if you want to implement your own Forth for > whatever reason, you should at least *learn* Forth by using an existing > modern Forth and developing a working ability using existing books > (preferably more modern books than Starting Forth) and tutorials before > starting the project. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth > It's a valid point. I wasted a lot of time reading articles such as the JonesForth and had to re-work a lot of code that I thought was done and dusted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 18:31 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <iug95n$ct8$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #3635 |
<Spam@ControlQ.com> wrote in message news:alpine.BSF.2.00.1106291251580.79427@yoko.controlq.com... > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > > > > I've never programmed in Forth either. I am implementing an interpreter > > for it. At this point, I think one _must_ implement their own version > > Good luck with your implementation, and if you have pointers to your work, > they would be appreciated ... (as a BoF) ... > There are some posts here which describe some aspects. I posted an update a while ago, "Status of my Forth interpreter in C" 10/15/2010. But, nothing showing my method of implementation. I've only added a handful of other Forth words, the current work is in other areas. Most C based Forth's are switch() based. Mine is not. It's ITC like an assembly version. I can setup compiled Forth words basically the same way as assembly, but in C. I've got a set of primitives or low-level words, in C, as well as a decent set of high level words, roughly half of ANS core. I doubt they are ANS compliant. That wasn't a goal at the time. It's fig-Forth like with stuff I think works well from other Forths or my own solutions, e.g., many fig-Forth definitions, -1 or all bits set for logical true (F83), Forth coded in Forth (i.e., primitives and compiled words) ala Ting and Muench, stuff that makes sense to me: CELLS, CELLS+, CHARS, CHARS+, etc. I can precompile words in C like assembly versions, or enter them from the interpreter command line. The stacks and dictionary currently have dependencies on the C code for them. Basically, it's a functional Forth. It's just more C than needs to be there. There are a handful of areas that I'm still working on: converting more code from C to Forth, implementing some of the remaining Forth control flow words, implementing input line-buffering, allowing text from files to be redirected through the interpreter (e.g., IN >IN LOAD FLOAD etc.) so I don't have to precompile so many words, elimination of C "background" code and dependence on it, flushing out more Forth words. After that stuff is done, it'll be a bit slower I think (less optimized C), but should be, in theory, mostly Forth, except for the primitives. Hopefully, after that, I'll be able to eliminate the C support code for the stacks and dictionary. If it works, that'll leave very little C code. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-29 23:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7xmxgzzwm5.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #3635 |
Spam@ControlQ.com writes: > http://www.ControlQ.com/blob/wordpress/?p=352 You mean: http://www.ControlQ.com/blog/wordpress/?p=352
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-01 09:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <88ednWXvUvpAQZDTnZ2dnUVZ8tudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #3607 |
Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201106.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote: > > C isn't ALGOL derived more than any HLL with control structures is ALGOL > derived. Yes it is, and its history is quite well documented: ALGOL 60 was the primary influence on CPL which was the primary influence on BCPL which was the primary influence on C. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-01 18:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lno4ax.evw@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #3691 |
In article <88ednWXvUvpAQZDTnZ2dnUVZ8tudnZ2d@supernews.com>, Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote: >Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201106.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote: >> >> C isn't ALGOL derived more than any HLL with control structures is ALGOL >> derived. > >Yes it is, and its history is quite well documented: > > ALGOL 60 was the primary influence on CPL > which was the primary influence on BCPL > which was the primary influence on C. I started with Algol, then FORTRAN, then C. A wrong Algol run ended with array index out of bounds or memory exhausted (The latter meaning infinite recursion) And a precise account where it happened. Both FORTRAN and C crash, with a coredump at best. C nor FORTRAN have a decent BN definition. FORTRAN nor C deserve to be called Algol-type, or Algol-derived languages. They are hackish mishmashes. (As is Forth, by the way.) > >Andrew. -- -- 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 16 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web