Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?]

From	"Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?]
Date	2012-11-15 07:15 -0500
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<k82m4s$j4u$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(14 earlier) <lo6dnQzHTZphWD3NnZ2dnUVZ8qqdnZ2d@supernews.com> <k7s561$lku$1@speranza.aioe.org> <7vOdnf3g2cvQvT_NnZ2dnUVZ8mGdnZ2d@supernews.com> <k7vv1v$1q6$1@speranza.aioe.org> <GtOdnYh--vAWFT7NnZ2dnUVZ8iCdnZ2d@supernews.com>

Show all headers | View raw

"Andrew Haley" <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote in message
news:GtOdnYh--vAWFT7NnZ2dnUVZ8iCdnZ2d@supernews.com...
> Rod Pemberton <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> wrote:
> > "Andrew Haley" <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:7vOdnf3g2cvQvT_NnZ2dnUVZ8mGdnZ2d@supernews.com...
> >> Rod Pemberton <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> wrote:
...

> >> > BTW, this is the original definition of COUNT:
> >> >
> >> > "      COUNT         addr1  ---  addr2  n                    L0
> >> >               Leave the byte address addr2 and byte count n of a
> >> >               message text beginning at addr1.  It is presumed that
> >> >               the first byte at addr1 contains the text byte count
> >> >               and the actual text starts with the second byte.
> >> >               Typically COUNT is followed by TYPE."
> >> >
> >> > It's also more accurate.
> >>
> >> [How] is it more accurate than the standard definition?
> >
> > It doesn't assume counted strings.
>
> In which case it would be less accurate; if your claim were true, which it
> isn't.

This depends on ones perspective.  As compared to valid implementations,
it's more accurate because it allows for other valid implementations that
don't use counted strings.  It's only less accurate if you believe that only
counted strings are the only valid representation for strings.

> FWIW, this isn't the "original" definition of COUNT .  COUNT dates
> from before fig-FORTH, and we'd need Elizabeth's help to find its
> earliest definition.
>

"FORTH - A Language for Interactive Computing" by Charles Moore and Geoffery
C. Leach, 1970 doesn't have COUNT or an equivalent that I see.

"Forth - The Early Years" by Chuck Moore, 1991 from HOPL, summarizes Forth
from 1958 to 1971.  It doesn't have COUNT or an equivalent listed.

Ms. Rather said COUNT has been around since 1971 elsewhere in this thread.

In "Threads of a FORTH Tapestry" by Gregg Williams, BYTE Magazine,
August 1980, he said that in 1979 he saw COUNT defined as:

  : COUNT 0 DO I . LOOP ;

COUNT is not listed in the Forth glossary in that 1980 issue.

Forth Dimensions, Vol.1 #2, 1978 - COUNT not listed in abbreviated glossary.
Forth Dimensions, Vol.2 #3, 1980 - COUNT used in another manner.
Forth Dimensions, Vol.3 #1, 1981 - COUNT used correctly in code.

Two fig-Forth documents from 1979 and 1980 have COUNT as posted.

COUNT appears in Chapter 10 of the online version of "Starting Forth" by Leo
Brodie, 1982.

Google Books shows various Forth books from 1983 to 1986 have COUNT.

COUNT is in John Hayes' VAX FORTH, 1984, net.lang.forth.

So, COUNT likely became available somewhere between 1971 and 1979.  To me,
it looks like it's more towards fig-Forth, since 1) that's where we found it
to be defined and 2) there are two uses of COUNT where it wasn't being used
correctly just prior to fig-Forth.  However, I didn't locate many references
online between those two dates.

> >> > It doesn't assume counted strings.
> >>
> >> Yes it does.  Read it again.
> >
> > No it doesn't.  Read it again.
> >
> > This time look for the word "presumed".
> > Look up the definition for "presumed".
>
> It's the past participle of the verb "to presume", which means
> variously, to assume to be true, to take for granted, to suppose, etc.

FYI, "assumed to be true" is different from "is true".  One is absolutely
true.  The other is predominantly true, but doesn't have to be true.

E.g., Dick Pountain's "Object-oriented Forth: implementation of data
structures" says:

"... For example, WORD returns the address of a packed string, but TYPE
wants an unpacked string argument, so the word COUNT must be used to
convert one to the other.  (Just for good measure Forth also throws in null
terminated strings in the inner workings of EXPECT which covers the gamut
of posssibilities.)"

That's a documented case of null terminated strings being used in Forth ...

> fig-FORTH isn't a standard; it is defined by its implementation.

It's a standard of the Forth Interest Group.  You mean it's not a standard
by a standards organization.  That's true.

Rod Pemberton

Thread

Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 04:58 -0700
  Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 05:22 -0700
    Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 05:44 -0700
      Re: Is there a better way? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 11:29 -0400
        Re: Is there a better way? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 11:40 -0400
          Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 08:45 -0700
            Re: Is there a better way? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-02 04:48 -0400
          Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 21:42 -0400
            Re: Is there a better way? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-01 19:19 -0700
              Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 13:06 -0400
                Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-02 12:18 -0500
                Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 14:34 -0400
                Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 11:39 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 14:43 -0400
                Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-04 02:36 -0600
                Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-04 14:18 -0500
                Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 14:38 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-04 03:01 -0600
                Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-04 03:54 -0800
                Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-04 07:59 -0600
                Re: Is there a better way? Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-04 08:34 -1000
                Re: Is there a better way? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-04 15:22 -0800
                Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-05 02:39 -0800
                Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-05 14:01 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-05 10:39 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-05 21:07 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-06 20:57 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-06 21:43 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-07 03:52 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-07 19:55 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-07 20:46 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-11-08 10:39 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-12 03:48 -0600
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-12 07:57 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-12 19:50 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-12 19:49 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-12 15:00 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-13 00:50 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-13 00:58 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-12 23:17 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-11-13 13:44 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-13 13:53 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-11-13 06:39 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-13 18:02 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-11-13 12:10 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-15 16:59 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-13 07:55 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-14 06:34 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-14 05:01 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-11-14 16:11 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-14 09:36 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-11-14 12:19 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-13 10:20 -0600
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-11-13 08:50 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-14 06:42 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-11-14 14:14 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-14 15:28 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-14 17:54 +0100
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-14 15:01 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-15 00:08 -0800
                Strings (was: Words consuming arguments) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-15 15:18 +0000
                Re: Strings (was: Words consuming arguments) albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-11-15 16:36 +0000
                Re: Strings (was: Words consuming arguments) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-15 18:35 -0500
                Re: Strings (was: Words consuming arguments) stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-11-16 00:36 +0000
                Re: Strings (was: Words consuming arguments) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-16 17:42 +0000
                Re: Strings (was: Words consuming arguments) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-16 17:55 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-17 04:18 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-11-17 04:56 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-17 07:24 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-19 15:58 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-11-20 08:17 -0800
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-14 06:30 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-14 09:06 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-15 06:18 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-13 04:26 -0600
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-14 06:29 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-14 06:03 -0600
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-15 07:15 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-15 11:51 -0600
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-15 18:44 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-16 03:50 -0600
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-15 08:09 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-06 21:19 -1000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-07 20:00 -0500
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-11-08 10:49 +0000
                Re: Words consuming arguments, was [Re: Is there a better way?] albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-11-07 14:01 +0000
                Re: Is there a better way? awegel@arcor.de (Alex Wegel) - 2012-11-04 11:07 +0100
                Re: Is there a better way? awegel@arcor.de (Alex Wegel) - 2012-11-04 11:36 +0100
                Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-04 03:48 -0800
                Re: Is there a better way? awegel@arcor.de (Alex Wegel) - 2012-11-04 13:31 +0100
                Re: Is there a better way? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-11-04 13:29 +0100
                Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-04 04:42 -0800
                Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-04 02:38 -0600
    Re: Is there a better way? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 10:20 -0400
  Re: Is there a better way? humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 05:53 -0700
  Re: Is there a better way? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 09:23 -0400
    Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 06:41 -0700
      Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-31 11:46 -0500
        Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:27 -0700
          Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 14:32 -0700
            Re: Is there a better way? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-10-31 16:15 -0700
          Re: Is there a better way? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-10-31 22:49 +0100
          Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-31 17:13 -0500
            Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 23:39 -0700
              Re: Is there a better way? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-31 20:58 -1000
              Re: Is there a better way? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-01 02:04 -0700
          Re: Is there a better way? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 19:13 -0400
          Re: Is there a better way? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-02 17:31 +0000
            Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 10:37 -0700
              Re: Is there a better way? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-02 18:12 +0000
                Re: Is there a better way? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-02 08:29 -1000
                Re: Is there a better way? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-05 14:53 +0000
                Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 11:30 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-03 00:15 +0100
                Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 19:21 -0400
                Re: Is there a better way? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-03 00:42 +0100
                Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 20:21 -0400
                Re: Is there a better way? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-03 01:44 +0100
                Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 12:12 -0400
                Re: Is there a better way? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-03 18:24 +0100
                Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 14:00 -0400
                Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 10:29 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 18:42 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-05 11:45 +0000
        Re: Is there a better way? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-11-01 21:00 +0000
  Re: Is there a better way? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-10-31 15:26 +0000
    Re: Is there a better way? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 12:22 -0400
      Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 15:07 -0700
        Re: Is there a better way? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 19:16 -0400
          Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 06:31 -0700
            Re: Is there a better way? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 10:34 -0400
              Re: Is there a better way? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 10:48 -0400
                Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 08:55 -0700
              Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 08:49 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 12:46 -0400
            Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-01 09:37 -0500
            Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-01 07:41 -0700
              Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 08:52 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-01 12:18 -0500
                Re: Is there a better way? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-01 19:38 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 02:29 -0700
                Re: Is there a better way? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-11-04 21:48 -0800
                Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-05 02:44 -0800
            Re: Is there a better way? Graham NEWS <gray@forthman.plus.com> - 2012-11-01 15:52 +0000
          Re: Is there a better way? Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2012-11-03 16:38 +0000
    Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:26 -0700
      Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 13:42 -0400
  Re: Is there a better way? Graham <""gray\"@forthman@plus.com"> - 2012-10-31 17:05 +0000
    Re: Is there a better way? Peter Fälth <peter.falth@tin.it> - 2012-10-31 12:07 -0700
      Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 12:12 -0700
        Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:17 -0700
    Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:21 -0700
      Re: Is there a better way? Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:50 -0700
        Re: Is there a better way? Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:51 -0700
          Re: Is there a better way? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 14:57 -0700
            Re: Is there a better way? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-10-31 23:47 +0100
              Re: Is there a better way? mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-11-01 21:28 +0200
        Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 15:11 -0700
          Re: Is there a better way? Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 15:44 -0700
            Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 13:55 -0400
  Re: Is there a better way? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-10-31 16:10 -0700
  Re: Is there a better way? Charles Mélice <charles.melice@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 01:10 -0700
    Re: Is there a better way? Charles Mélice <charles.melice@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 01:18 -0700
    Re: Is there a better way? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 01:58 -0700
      Re: Is there a better way? Charles Mélice <charles.melice@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 02:14 -0700
        Re: Is there a better way? Charles Mélice <charles.melice@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 02:16 -0700
          Re: Is there a better way? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-02 06:16 -0500
            Re: Is there a better way? Charles Mélice <charles.melice@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 06:04 -0700
    Re: Is there a better way? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 13:13 -0400

csiph-web