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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #40767 > unrolled thread

Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge

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

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge borota@gmail.com - 2015-07-23 20:14 -0700
    Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 01:21 -0700
      Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge borota@gmail.com - 2015-07-24 04:43 -0700
        Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-26 21:04 -0700
          Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2015-07-28 06:46 -0700
            Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge borota@gmail.com - 2015-07-28 20:11 -0700
              Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-07-29 08:33 +0100
                Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2015-08-01 09:16 -0700

#40767 — Re: jonesforth: taking up the challenge

On Friday, June 7, 2013 at 2:37:06 AM UTC-5, Mark Wills wrote:
> On Jun 4, 7:14 pm, alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
> wrote:
> > Remember we discussed jonesforth at the German convention?
> > I take up the challenge to make a similar forth.
> >
> > What do we want? The enticement of jonesforth but
> >   - ISO compatibility (for all words with an ISO name that is)
> >   - no words in assembler if Forth is feasible
> >   - one file, Forth coded in assembler
> >
> > The last two points are related, jonesforth has a startup library
> > in Forth:
> >
> > cat jonesforth.f - | jonesforth
> >
> > But this means a whole working interpreter must be present and be
> > coded in assembler.   This I don't like at all.
> >
> > Part of the enticement of jonesforth is its introduction.
> >
> > I cannot totally agree with it. Here are my proposed changes.
> >
> > jones:
> >         FORTH is one of those alien languages which most working
> >         programmers regard in the same way as Haskell, LISP, and so
> >         on. Something so strange that they'd rather any thoughts of it
> >         just go away so they can get on with writing this paying code.
> >         But that's wrong and if you care at all about programming then
> >         you should at least understand all these languages, even if
> >         you will never use them.
> >
> > horst:
> >         FORTH is one of those alien languages which most working
> >         programmers regard in the same way as Haskell, LISP, and so
> >         on. Something so strange that they'd rather any thoughts of it
> >         just go away so they can get on with writing this paying code.
> >         But that's wrong and if you care at all about programming then
> >         you should at understand at least a bit about other languages
> >         than the ubiquitous c, Java or Python.
> >
> > jones:
> >         LISP is the ultimate high-level language, and features from
> >         LISP are being added every decade to the more common
> >         languages. But FORTH is in some ways the ultimate in low level
> >         programming. Out of the box it lacks features like dynamic
> >         memory management and even strings. In fact, at its primitive
> >         level it lacks even basic concepts like IF-statements and
> >         loops.
> >
> > horst:
> > ~        LISP is the ultimate lanugages, with unlimited flexibility as
> > ~        long as you're prepared to use round brackets. Forth rivals
> >         that flexibility, as long as you're prepared to separate your
> >         words with spaces. Forth is the ultimate do-it-yourself
> >         language. Even basic concepts like IF-statements and loops
> >         are molded to you liking. Things like dynamic memory
> >         management are an add on. Out of the box it lacks almost
> >         everything.
> >
> > jones:
> >         Why then would you want to learn FORTH? There are several very
> >         good reasons. First and foremost, FORTH is minimal. You really
> >         can write a complete FORTH in, say, 2000 lines of code. I
> >         don't just mean a FORTH program, I mean a complete FORTH
> >         operating system, environment and language. You could boot
> >         such a FORTH on a bare PC and it would come up with a prompt
> >         where you could start doing useful work. The FORTH you have
> >         here isn't minimal and uses a Linux process as its 'base PC'
> >         (both for the purposes of making it a good tutorial). It's
> >         possible to completely understand the system. Who can say they
> >         completely understand how Linux works, or gcc?
> >
> > horst:
> >         Why then would you want to learn FORTH? There are several very
> >         good reasons. First and foremost, there is a bright side to
> >         this minimality. Not counting the comment lines you can have
> >         a complete FORTH in 768 lines of code. I don't just mean a
> >         FORTH program, I mean a complete FORTH operating system,
> >         environment and language. You could boot such a FORTH on a
> >         bare PC and it would come up with a prompt where you could
> >         start doing useful work. The FORTH you have here is equally
> >         minimal, as long as you take for granted the Linux environment
> >         where it lives. (requiring you to use a bare pc would not make
> >         for a good tutorial) It's possible to completely understand
> >         the system. Who can say they completely understand how Linux
> >         works, or gcc?
> >
> > Comments welcome. Trying to make a working jonesforth look alike
> > today. The text will be more work, I presume.
> >
> > Groetjes Albert
> > --
> > Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
> > Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
> > albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=nhttp://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
> >
> >
> 
> I'd be interested in seeing this. I could help out with English
> documentation if required.
> 
> I remember that Ting did a lot of work (for years?) on distilling his
> Forths down to the very minimum of code words, and having the vast
> majority of his Forth systems written in Forth. Was that eForth? I
> think it was. Can't remember now.

So Mark, are you stil interested in improving the English for https://bitbucket.org/avanderhorst/yourforth/overview ? I am not native speaker so can't do it much better myself, but I think yourforth would really benefit from a little tlc.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#40774

On Friday, 24 July 2015 04:14:43 UTC+1, bor...@gmail.com  wrote:
> On Friday, June 7, 2013 at 2:37:06 AM UTC-5, Mark Wills wrote:
> > On Jun 4, 7:14 pm, alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
> > wrote:
> > > Remember we discussed jonesforth at the German convention?
> > > I take up the challenge to make a similar forth.
> > >
> > > What do we want? The enticement of jonesforth but
> > >   - ISO compatibility (for all words with an ISO name that is)
> > >   - no words in assembler if Forth is feasible
> > >   - one file, Forth coded in assembler
> > >
> > > The last two points are related, jonesforth has a startup library
> > > in Forth:
> > >
> > > cat jonesforth.f - | jonesforth
> > >
> > > But this means a whole working interpreter must be present and be
> > > coded in assembler.   This I don't like at all.
> > >
> > > Part of the enticement of jonesforth is its introduction.
> > >
> > > I cannot totally agree with it. Here are my proposed changes.
> > >
> > > jones:
> > >         FORTH is one of those alien languages which most working
> > >         programmers regard in the same way as Haskell, LISP, and so
> > >         on. Something so strange that they'd rather any thoughts of it
> > >         just go away so they can get on with writing this paying code.
> > >         But that's wrong and if you care at all about programming then
> > >         you should at least understand all these languages, even if
> > >         you will never use them.
> > >
> > > horst:
> > >         FORTH is one of those alien languages which most working
> > >         programmers regard in the same way as Haskell, LISP, and so
> > >         on. Something so strange that they'd rather any thoughts of it
> > >         just go away so they can get on with writing this paying code.
> > >         But that's wrong and if you care at all about programming then
> > >         you should at understand at least a bit about other languages
> > >         than the ubiquitous c, Java or Python.
> > >
> > > jones:
> > >         LISP is the ultimate high-level language, and features from
> > >         LISP are being added every decade to the more common
> > >         languages. But FORTH is in some ways the ultimate in low level
> > >         programming. Out of the box it lacks features like dynamic
> > >         memory management and even strings. In fact, at its primitive
> > >         level it lacks even basic concepts like IF-statements and
> > >         loops.
> > >
> > > horst:
> > > ~        LISP is the ultimate lanugages, with unlimited flexibility as
> > > ~        long as you're prepared to use round brackets. Forth rivals
> > >         that flexibility, as long as you're prepared to separate your
> > >         words with spaces. Forth is the ultimate do-it-yourself
> > >         language. Even basic concepts like IF-statements and loops
> > >         are molded to you liking. Things like dynamic memory
> > >         management are an add on. Out of the box it lacks almost
> > >         everything.
> > >
> > > jones:
> > >         Why then would you want to learn FORTH? There are several very
> > >         good reasons. First and foremost, FORTH is minimal. You really
> > >         can write a complete FORTH in, say, 2000 lines of code. I
> > >         don't just mean a FORTH program, I mean a complete FORTH
> > >         operating system, environment and language. You could boot
> > >         such a FORTH on a bare PC and it would come up with a prompt
> > >         where you could start doing useful work. The FORTH you have
> > >         here isn't minimal and uses a Linux process as its 'base PC'
> > >         (both for the purposes of making it a good tutorial). It's
> > >         possible to completely understand the system. Who can say they
> > >         completely understand how Linux works, or gcc?
> > >
> > > horst:
> > >         Why then would you want to learn FORTH? There are several very
> > >         good reasons. First and foremost, there is a bright side to
> > >         this minimality. Not counting the comment lines you can have
> > >         a complete FORTH in 768 lines of code. I don't just mean a
> > >         FORTH program, I mean a complete FORTH operating system,
> > >         environment and language. You could boot such a FORTH on a
> > >         bare PC and it would come up with a prompt where you could
> > >         start doing useful work. The FORTH you have here is equally
> > >         minimal, as long as you take for granted the Linux environment
> > >         where it lives. (requiring you to use a bare pc would not make
> > >         for a good tutorial) It's possible to completely understand
> > >         the system. Who can say they completely understand how Linux
> > >         works, or gcc?
> > >
> > > Comments welcome. Trying to make a working jonesforth look alike
> > > today. The text will be more work, I presume.
> > >
> > > Groetjes Albert
> > > --
> > > Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
> > > Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
> > > albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=nhttp://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > I'd be interested in seeing this. I could help out with English
> > documentation if required.
> > 
> > I remember that Ting did a lot of work (for years?) on distilling his
> > Forths down to the very minimum of code words, and having the vast
> > majority of his Forth systems written in Forth. Was that eForth? I
> > think it was. Can't remember now.
> 
> So Mark, are you stil interested in improving the English for https://bitbucket.org/avanderhorst/yourforth/overview ? I am not native speaker so can't do it much better myself, but I think yourforth would really benefit from a little tlc.

Sure. Are you talking specifically about yourforth.html ?

Mark

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

#40778

Yourforth.fas

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

#40815

On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 4:43:11 AM UTC-7, bor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Yourforth.fas

I just glanced over it, and it looks very readable.  In fact, I find
  the default syntax highlighting errors (triggered mostly by single
  quote chars in the comments) to be much more distracting than the
  dozen-or-so misspelled words and typographic errors.  Your command
  of the written English language easily exceeds that of many native
  speakers, at least on my side of "the pond".

Mike B.

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

#40873

On Monday, July 27, 2015 at 12:04:07 AM UTC-4, Michael Barry wrote:
> On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 4:43:11 AM UTC-7, bor...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Yourforth.fas
> 
> I just glanced over it, and it looks very readable.  In fact, I find
>   the default syntax highlighting errors (triggered mostly by single
>   quote chars in the comments) to be much more distracting than the
>   dozen-or-so misspelled words and typographic errors.  Your command
>   of the written English language easily exceeds that of many native
>   speakers, at least on my side of "the pond".
> 
> Mike B.


Not to diminish any of the work done so far but as is common, someone else has
 walked this path. I just found this.

http://www.dst-corp.com/james/JonesForthInC-V148.html

Mr. Larson appears to have done quite bit of work to create a windows version
 and has gone quiet far in getting Jonesforth to be more ANS/ISO compatible.

I tried to compile it unchanged with Codeblocks 13.12 and got a lot of this:

C:\Users\Public\Dev\Forth\jonesforth Windows\JonesForthInC.c|728|warning:
 'naked' attribute directive ignored [-Wattributes]|

C:\Users\Public\Dev\Forth\jonesforth Windows\JonesForthInC.c||In function
 'DOCOL':|
C:\Users\Public\Dev\Forth\jonesforth Windows\JonesForthInC.c|728|error: '_asm'
 undeclared (first use in this function)|

Knowing nothing about codeblocks configuration I suspect I have a lot of learning curve to ride.

BF

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

#40883

From http://git.annexia.org/?p=jonesforth.git;a=blob;f=jonesforth.S;h=45e6e854a5d2a4c3f26af264dfce56379d401425;hb=66c56998125f3ac265a3a1df9821fd52cfeee8cc
"This code draws heavily on the design of LINA FORTH 
    (http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst/lina.html) by Albert van der Horst.  
    Any similarities in the code are probably not accidental."

So now that Albert van der Horst has kindly took the effort to document his code, why not go straight to the source?
From what I could gather Albert's implementation is closer to the standard. Building a windows version based on his Linux implementation should be pretty straightforward and with not too many mods.


On Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 8:46:21 AM UTC-5, foxaudio...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, July 27, 2015 at 12:04:07 AM UTC-4, Michael Barry wrote:
> > On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 4:43:11 AM UTC-7, bor...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Yourforth.fas
> > 
> > I just glanced over it, and it looks very readable.  In fact, I find
> >   the default syntax highlighting errors (triggered mostly by single
> >   quote chars in the comments) to be much more distracting than the
> >   dozen-or-so misspelled words and typographic errors.  Your command
> >   of the written English language easily exceeds that of many native
> >   speakers, at least on my side of "the pond".
> > 
> > Mike B.
> 
> 
> Not to diminish any of the work done so far but as is common, someone else has
>  walked this path. I just found this.
> 
> http://www.dst-corp.com/james/JonesForthInC-V148.html
> 
> Mr. Larson appears to have done quite bit of work to create a windows version
>  and has gone quiet far in getting Jonesforth to be more ANS/ISO compatible.
> 
> I tried to compile it unchanged with Codeblocks 13.12 and got a lot of this:
> 
> C:\Users\Public\Dev\Forth\jonesforth Windows\JonesForthInC.c|728|warning:
>  'naked' attribute directive ignored [-Wattributes]|
> 
> C:\Users\Public\Dev\Forth\jonesforth Windows\JonesForthInC.c||In function
>  'DOCOL':|
> C:\Users\Public\Dev\Forth\jonesforth Windows\JonesForthInC.c|728|error: '_asm'
>  undeclared (first use in this function)|
> 
> Knowing nothing about codeblocks configuration I suspect I have a lot of learning curve to ride.
> 
> BF

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

#40887

On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 20:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
borota@gmail.com wrote:

> From
> http://git.annexia.org/?p=jonesforth.git;a=blob;f=jonesforth.S;h=45e6e854a5d2a4c3f26af264dfce56379d401425;hb=66c56998125f3ac265a3a1df9821fd52cfeee8cc
> "This code draws heavily on the design of LINA FORTH
> (http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst/lina.html) by
> Albert van der Horst. Any similarities in the code are
> probably not accidental."
> 
> So now that Albert van der Horst has kindly took the effort to
> document his code, why not go straight to the source? From
> what I could gather Albert's implementation is closer to the
> standard. Building a windows version based on his Linux
> implementation should be pretty straightforward and with not
> too many mods.

Perhaps start by downloading Albert's wina:

http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst/forthimpl.html

Jan Coombs. 
-- 
email valid, else fix dots and hyphen
jan4clf2014@murrayhyphenmicroftdotcodotuk

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

#41043

On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 3:33:45 AM UTC-4, Jan Coombs <Jan-54 > wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 20:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
> borota@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > From
> > http://git.annexia.org/?p=jonesforth.git;a=blob;f=jonesforth.S;h=45e6e854a5d2a4c3f26af264dfce56379d401425;hb=66c56998125f3ac265a3a1df9821fd52cfeee8cc
> > "This code draws heavily on the design of LINA FORTH
> > (http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst/lina.html) by
> > Albert van der Horst. Any similarities in the code are
> > probably not accidental."
> > 
> > So now that Albert van der Horst has kindly took the effort to
> > document his code, why not go straight to the source? From
> > what I could gather Albert's implementation is closer to the
> > standard. Building a windows version based on his Linux
> > implementation should be pretty straightforward and with not
> > too many mods.
> 
> Perhaps start by downloading Albert's wina:
> 
> http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst/forthimpl.html
> 
> Jan Coombs. 
> -- 
> email valid, else fix dots and hyphen
> jan4clf2014@murrayhyphenmicroftdotcodotuk

Thanks Jan,

I downedloaded WINA and it works very well. Great platform for people to learn Forth. The Assembler source is very well written and clear to read.  Reminds in some ways of MVP Forth by Haydn (my first PC forth) 

In contrast Mr. Larson's Forth did not seem to run properly when I did a simple test. (do loops) 

WINA does vary a little from ISO and that could create some confusion with newbies depending on their background.  I am thinking of porting my old block editor to it for fun.

Not sure I can go back to blocks after working with files for so long. :-)

Need to look at yourforth more closely as well.

Thanks again for the link.

BF

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web