Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #41632 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-01 00:49 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-10-06 01:37 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 132 — 35 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 00:49 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? mentificium@gmail.com - 2015-09-01 04:18 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Steve Graham <jsgrahamus@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-01 09:51 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Andreas Wagner <andreas.wagner@lowfatcomputing.org> - 2015-09-01 10:23 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-02 13:53 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Greg <borota@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 17:35 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-04 18:27 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 21:04 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 00:27 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-04 21:48 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 01:10 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 22:19 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-04 23:31 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 07:28 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 08:10 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2015-09-05 09:05 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-09-05 09:07 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 13:08 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-09-05 16:32 +0000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-05 22:19 +0200
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-05 13:28 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-09-06 12:09 +0000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2015-09-06 13:27 -0500
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-09-07 15:36 +0000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-07 09:46 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-05 14:20 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-06 20:52 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 12:11 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-05 19:56 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Greg <borota@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 09:39 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? mhx@iae.nl - 2015-09-06 13:01 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? borota@gmail.com - 2015-09-06 18:48 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-06 19:43 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? borota@gmail.com - 2015-09-06 20:59 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-08 19:46 +0000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? borota@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 13:28 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2015-09-08 17:27 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-09 03:35 +0200
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-08 19:48 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 20:28 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2015-09-08 20:48 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-08 21:00 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 21:35 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? mhx@iae.nl - 2015-09-10 15:20 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2015-09-10 17:26 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-10 14:57 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? julian.fondren@endurance.com - 2015-09-10 20:47 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2015-09-11 10:49 +0200
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2015-09-11 10:16 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 07:42 +0300
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 18:41 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 19:24 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-08 20:59 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Greg <borota@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 15:47 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? borota@gmail.com - 2015-09-11 08:15 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-10-04 19:59 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-04 17:48 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-04 21:10 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2015-10-05 00:53 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 03:51 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-04 18:58 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-04 23:35 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-04 23:44 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-05 08:54 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-05 12:58 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 01:35 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2015-10-06 02:58 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 04:05 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 04:22 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2015-10-06 15:00 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-06 16:02 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 07:49 +0300
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-06 15:04 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-09 14:16 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 09:34 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-06 09:08 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-06 20:49 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 00:56 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-06 21:11 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-09 21:07 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-10 19:38 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-10 20:46 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 01:16 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-10-10 22:50 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-04 21:21 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-10-05 08:26 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 07:13 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-10 00:12 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 11:48 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-08 20:55 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-09 02:28 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? november.nihal@gmail.com - 2015-09-09 03:36 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Marek Brunda <marekb@phoenics.org> - 2015-09-09 03:59 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-09 07:34 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2015-09-09 12:32 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-10 17:10 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-09 18:59 +0000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Whammo <sidciavic@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 12:28 -0700
structs/unions/records (was: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-09-09 07:10 +0000
Re: structs/unions/records (was: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction?) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-09 02:18 -0700
Re: structs/unions/records rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 23:27 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-06 23:18 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2015-09-07 12:57 +0200
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-07 09:55 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-07 18:45 +0000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2015-09-08 00:13 +0200
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-08 01:51 +0200
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2015-09-08 00:13 +0200
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-07 18:27 +0000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? borota@gmail.com - 2015-09-07 12:23 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 16:14 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-07 17:39 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 01:39 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 03:12 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2015-09-05 09:02 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-05 16:47 +0000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 11:13 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? josv@planet.nl - 2015-09-01 12:37 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-01 22:02 +0200
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-08 03:45 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-08 07:54 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 19:08 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 15:00 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 23:18 -0400
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? p.lad.work@gmail.com - 2015-10-05 05:04 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2015-10-05 06:39 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 18:44 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-05 17:47 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 21:58 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-06 10:55 -0700
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-06 09:13 -1000
Re: Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 01:37 -0400
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-01 00:49 -0700 |
| Subject | Could Forth be getting a bit of traction? |
| Message-ID | <ca411208-dff1-45ff-8111-1dffbfb32baf@googlegroups.com> |
At last? Check out this link: https://moonforth.github.io/ Someone has spent a LOT of time on that. Also check out the links, which link to a lot of Forth related stuff that I haven't seen before. Brilliant stuff.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mentificium@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-01 04:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1021c121-b46a-4622-9188-7dd2af16afd6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41632 |
On Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 12:49:33 AM UTC-7, Mark Wills wrote: > At last? > > Check out this link: > > https://moonforth.github.io/ > > Someone has spent a LOT of time on that. > Also check out the links, which link to a lot of > Forth related stuff that I haven't seen before. > > Brilliant stuff. As a Forthcoder of Strong AI in English at http://www.nlg-wiki.org/systems/Mind.Forth and in German the language of science at http://www.nlg-wiki.org/systems/Wotan I thank you for your posting. Cheers, Arthur T. Murray/Mentifex -- Major goal in life: Trigger a Technological Singularity; Minor goal: Overthrow the unelected government of China; Minor goal: Win a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine; Minor goal: [X] Reunification of East and West Germany.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Graham <jsgrahamus@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-01 09:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ms4l2p$vpr$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #41632 |
Mark Wills wrote: > At last? > > Check out this link: > > https://moonforth.github.io/ > > Someone has spent a LOT of time on that. Also check out the links, which link to a lot of Forth related stuff that I haven't seen before. > > Brilliant stuff. > Thanks, Mark. Very interesting. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Wagner <andreas.wagner@lowfatcomputing.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-01 10:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8ca7934b-ecc4-48f0-8e97-8f1240d4c997@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41632 |
On Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 3:49:33 AM UTC-4, Mark Wills wrote: > At last? > > Check out this link: > > https://moonforth.github.io/ > > Someone has spent a LOT of time on that. Also check out the links, which link to a lot of Forth related stuff that I haven't seen before. > > Brilliant stuff. "Could Forth be getting a bit of traction?" I've been seeing the phrase "I'm new to Forth" quite a bit lately.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 13:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c3ed15b4-e93e-4638-904a-6e4fa368ed31@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41643 |
On Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 10:23:39 AM UTC-7, Andreas Wagner wrote: > "Could Forth be getting a bit of traction?" > > I've been seeing the phrase "I'm new to Forth" quite a bit lately. Pretty much everybody who is new to Forth, will go directly to Standard Forth and will read the standard textbook: "Forth Application Techniques." On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 7:30:10 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > Here's [an array definer] presented in my Forth Application Techniques that I think is > far more useful than the FSL version: > > : ARRAY ( n -- ) CREATE DUP , CELLS ALLOT > DOES> ( n -- a) SWAP OVER @ OVER < OVER > 1 < OR ABORT" Out of Range" CELLS + ; The newbie will then say: "This is stupid! The person who wrote this is not a programmer! But if the 'leading-expert' in Forth is a phony, then this implies that every Forth programmer is a phony, because otherwise why would they accept a phony as their leader? This implies that every story of success with Forth is a lie, and that nobody has ever succeeded in writing a Forth program that works." That should kill the newbie's enthusiasm for Forth --- and, if that doesn't do it, Elizabeth Rather will denounce the newbie for being homophobic --- so, while many will say "I'm new to Forth," very few will get past this stage to the next stage in which they have learned how to write programs (Elizabeth Rather herself has never gotten to the stage in which she has learned how to write programs, and instead she jumped straight into teaching).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg <borota@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 17:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <998e315e-9945-4bbb-b512-4d5503746525@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41668 |
On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 3:53:32 PM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 10:23:39 AM UTC-7, Andreas Wagner wrote: > > "Could Forth be getting a bit of traction?" > > > > I've been seeing the phrase "I'm new to Forth" quite a bit lately. > > Pretty much everybody who is new to Forth, will go directly to Standard Forth and will read the standard textbook: "Forth Application Techniques." > > On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 7:30:10 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > Here's [an array definer] presented in my Forth Application Techniques that I think is > > far more useful than the FSL version: > > > > : ARRAY ( n -- ) CREATE DUP , CELLS ALLOT > > DOES> ( n -- a) SWAP OVER @ OVER < OVER > > 1 < OR ABORT" Out of Range" CELLS + ; > > The newbie will then say: "This is stupid! The person who wrote this is not a programmer! But if the 'leading-expert' in Forth is a phony, then this implies that every Forth programmer is a phony, because otherwise why would they accept a phony as their leader? This implies that every story of success with Forth is a lie, and that nobody has ever succeeded in writing a Forth program that works." > > That should kill the newbie's enthusiasm for Forth --- and, if that doesn't do it, Elizabeth Rather will denounce the newbie for being homophobic --- so, while many will say "I'm new to Forth," very few will get past this stage to the next stage in which they have learned how to write programs (Elizabeth Rather herself has never gotten to the stage in which she has learned how to write programs, and instead she jumped straight into teaching). ------------------------------------------------ As somebody "new to Forth" I find "Forth Application Techniques" to be the best introductory text to Forth I could get my hands on. Being mostly an introductory text, maybe the title is a bit inflated, but it's still the best Forth teaching book I could find. At least for somebody who is not totally illiterate as far as computers go. You seem to have such a low view of it though, may I know then what is the better introductory Forth resource that you'd recommend? Usually when you "take something out", some little common-sense dictates to also be ready to put something else and place and not leave a "power-vacuum".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 18:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c730b8d0-fc32-42b0-b05e-4d13d2a81036@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41739 |
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 5:35:52 PM UTC-7, Greg wrote: > On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 3:53:32 PM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 10:23:39 AM UTC-7, Andreas Wagner wrote: > > > "Could Forth be getting a bit of traction?" > > > > > > I've been seeing the phrase "I'm new to Forth" quite a bit lately. > > > > Pretty much everybody who is new to Forth, will go directly to Standard Forth and will read the standard textbook: "Forth Application Techniques." > > > > On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 7:30:10 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > > Here's [an array definer] presented in my Forth Application Techniques that I think is > > > far more useful than the FSL version: > > > > > > : ARRAY ( n -- ) CREATE DUP , CELLS ALLOT > > > DOES> ( n -- a) SWAP OVER @ OVER < OVER > > > 1 < OR ABORT" Out of Range" CELLS + ; > > > > The newbie will then say: "This is stupid! The person who wrote this is not a programmer! But if the 'leading-expert' in Forth is a phony, then this implies that every Forth programmer is a phony, because otherwise why would they accept a phony as their leader? This implies that every story of success with Forth is a lie, and that nobody has ever succeeded in writing a Forth program that works." > > > > That should kill the newbie's enthusiasm for Forth --- and, if that doesn't do it, Elizabeth Rather will denounce the newbie for being homophobic --- so, while many will say "I'm new to Forth," very few will get past this stage to the next stage in which they have learned how to write programs (Elizabeth Rather herself has never gotten to the stage in which she has learned how to write programs, and instead she jumped straight into teaching). > > ------------------------------------------------ > > As somebody "new to Forth" I find "Forth Application Techniques" to be the > best introductory text to Forth I could get my hands on. Being mostly an > introductory text, maybe the title is a bit inflated, but it's still the best > Forth teaching book I could find. At least for somebody who is not totally > illiterate as far as computers go. > > You seem to have such a low view of it though, may I know then what is the > better introductory Forth resource that you'd recommend? > > Usually when you "take something out", some little common-sense dictates to > also be ready to put something else and place and not leave a "power-vacuum". You could try: http://www.forth.org/novice.html This isn't a book, although it is commented plus there are some documentation files. The important thing about the novice package is that I provide general-purpose data-structures --- you can write application programs without getting bogged down in low-level code such as implementing arrays, lists, associations, etc. --- I think most who are "new to Forth" become discouraged because they aren't succeeding at writing application programs and they find implementing data-structures to be boring and difficult (I found ASSOCIATION.4TH to be a grind to implement, but it is done now so it doesn't have to be rewritten by me or anybody else) --- many novices quit Forth before they have ever written a single application program, just because they spent all their time on data-structures and their enthusiasm fizzled out, so they were done with Forth. The important distinction between myself and Elizabeth Rather, is that I don't claim to set the standard for the industry and damn everybody else as being non-standard --- that, plus I write code that works!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 21:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2eae1f37-03de-46cb-aec5-982f71867270@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41740 |
> The important distinction between myself and Elizabeth Rather, is that I don't claim to set the standard for the industry and damn everybody else as being non-standard --- that, plus I write code that works! Alright, I'll chime in as I've been on my soap box for the last day or so :-) Regardless of whether or not Elizabeth defined a standard or is a forth coding guru, she's the one person (and Stephen Pelc) who at least keep forth somewhat relevant by peddling their product. Yes, it might be self-serving but hey, everybody needs to eat. If both Elizabeth and Stephen would throw in the towel, forth would pretty much get ZERO commercial coverage. Running a business is hard, especially in a niche area like this, so I commend them for doing there thing. A lot of people have come and gone (Koopman, Eric La-Forest), kicked the forth tires and moved on to other fields. Given that,you've got to give her props for sticking with it, whatever the motivation. If we want forth to become more popular / mainstream, we've got to get out of this mindset that there is only one forth and put up this wall to anyone who's new to forth is an idiot who needs to be put in his place. Just my 2 cents... -Mux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 00:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msdqst$69o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #41743 |
On 9/5/2015 12:04 AM, Mux wrote: >> The important distinction between myself and Elizabeth Rather, is that I don't claim to set the standard for the industry and damn everybody else as being non-standard --- that, plus I write code that works! > > Alright, I'll chime in as I've been on my soap box for the last day or so :-) > > Regardless of whether or not Elizabeth defined a standard or is a forth coding guru, she's the one person (and Stephen Pelc) who at least keep forth somewhat relevant by peddling their product. Yes, it might be self-serving but hey, everybody needs to eat. > > If both Elizabeth and Stephen would throw in the towel, forth would pretty much get ZERO commercial coverage. Running a business is hard, especially in a niche area like this, so I commend them for doing there thing. > > A lot of people have come and gone (Koopman, Eric La-Forest), kicked the forth tires and moved on to other fields. Given that,you've got to give her props for sticking with it, whatever the motivation. > > If we want forth to become more popular / mainstream, we've got to get out of this mindset that there is only one forth and put up this wall to anyone who's new to forth is an idiot who needs to be put in his place. > > Just my 2 cents... Yer wasting your time with this one. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 21:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e0288417-65a9-4d72-8d37-d2aeb8acbb01@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41743 |
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 9:04:39 PM UTC-7, Mux wrote: > > The important distinction between myself and Elizabeth Rather, is that I don't claim to set the standard for the industry and damn everybody else as being non-standard --- that, plus I write code that works! > > Alright, I'll chime in as I've been on my soap box for the last day or so :-) > > Regardless of whether or not Elizabeth defined a standard or is a forth coding guru, she's the one person (and Stephen Pelc) who at least keep forth somewhat relevant by peddling their product. Yes, it might be self-serving but hey, everybody needs to eat. > > If both Elizabeth and Stephen would throw in the towel, forth would pretty much get ZERO commercial coverage. Running a business is hard, especially in a niche area like this, so I commend them for doing there thing. Elizabeth Rather's contribution has always been negative --- she drives away far more people than she attracts --- worse, she drives away real programmers and attracts idiots, giving the Forth community the reputation of being a haven for idiots who have failed at programming the mainstream languages. > If we want forth to become more popular / mainstream, we've got to get out of this mindset that there is only one forth and put up this wall to anyone who's new to forth is an idiot who needs to be put in his place. This is an argument for ANS-Forth??? The premise of ANS-Forth has always been that ANS-Forth is the only Forth and everybody else can go to non-standard hell --- when I was new to ANS-Forth the first question I asked was why there was no D/ (I needed this for my continued-fractions program), and I was treated as an idiot who needed to be put in my place: On Friday, November 20, 2009 at 12:07:12 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D Rather wrote: > Forth's design is pragmatic: it has functions that have been needed and > that have proven their usefulness *in Forth*, not necessarily those that > have been required in other languages. Generally speaking, Forth has > the most flexible set of *integer* arithmetic operators of any language. > In particular, M*/ was one of Chuck's most brilliant innovations. I'm > sure if Chuck were trying to do your continued fractions that is what he > would rely on. Yes, that sometimes requires thinking differently, like > many other things in Forth. This, of course, is nonsense --- I ended up using a D/ written in Forth (grossly inefficient) --- she is just telling me that I'm an idiot and putting me in my place, but she isn't providing any code for continued-fractions (she has no idea what continued-fractions are). Thinking differently??? Differently from what? Reality? I really don't believe that brown-nosing Elizabeth Rather is a viable path into the future --- it didn't work very well during the last two decades --- Forth's popularity plummeted after ANS-Forth came out in 1994, with almost everybody switching over to C. BTW: What does "commercial coverage" mean? I'm not familiar with that term. Do you mean Forth being used in commercial products? Nobody really cares what language was used or even what micro-processor was used --- they just buy boards and expect them to do whatever it is that they do --- the bean-counters need something to count, and boards are what they count. Maybe by "commercial coverage" you mean programming jobs --- there are none in Forth, and there haven't been in two decades --- ANS-Forth killed that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 01:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msdtdf$c38$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #41745 |
On 9/5/2015 12:48 AM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 9:04:39 PM UTC-7, Mux wrote: >>> The important distinction between myself and Elizabeth Rather, is that I don't claim to set the standard for the industry and damn everybody else as being non-standard --- that, plus I write code that works! >> >> Alright, I'll chime in as I've been on my soap box for the last day or so :-) >> >> Regardless of whether or not Elizabeth defined a standard or is a forth coding guru, she's the one person (and Stephen Pelc) who at least keep forth somewhat relevant by peddling their product. Yes, it might be self-serving but hey, everybody needs to eat. >> >> If both Elizabeth and Stephen would throw in the towel, forth would pretty much get ZERO commercial coverage. Running a business is hard, especially in a niche area like this, so I commend them for doing there thing. > > Elizabeth Rather's contribution has always been negative --- she drives away far more people than she attracts --- worse, she drives away real programmers and attracts idiots, giving the Forth community the reputation of being a haven for idiots who have failed at programming the mainstream languages. See what I mean... -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 22:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <53e77c00-3c0d-449e-b8f2-9e274581d01b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41745 |
> Elizabeth Rather's contribution has always been negative --- she drives away far more people than she attracts --- worse, she drives away real programmers and attracts idiots, giving the Forth community the reputation of being a haven for idiots who have failed at programming the mainstream languages. > The world isn't filled with 'real' programmers. I'd argue that the majority of programmers in the world are mediocre. That said, in order for forth to become a more mainstream language, you have to attract and educate those programmers in order to bring them over. > This is an argument for ANS-Forth??? The premise of ANS-Forth has always been that ANS-Forth is the only Forth and everybody else can go to non-standard hell --- when I was new to ANS-Forth the first question I asked was why there was no D/ (I needed this for my continued-fractions program), and I was treated as an idiot who needed to be put in my place: Nope. I really don't care about standards to be honest. That's one of the nice things about forth IMO. While that scuppers the portability of code, it nicely goes with Chuck's argument that a forth application consists of a minimal set of words that describes the problem. > This, of course, is nonsense --- I ended up using a D/ written in Forth (grossly inefficient) --- she is just telling me that I'm an idiot and putting me in my place, but she isn't providing any code for continued-fractions (she has no idea what continued-fractions are). This is kinda what I was getting at. For a newcomer to forth, this whole tit-for-tat doesn't do the community any good. If anything, it confuses people as they now don't know which solution to pick. Getting into these spats is a dead-end and doesn't help anyone. > I really don't believe that brown-nosing Elizabeth Rather is a viable path into the future --- it didn't work very well during the last two decades --- Forth's popularity plummeted after ANS-Forth came out in 1994, with almost everybody switching over to C. I'm not brown-nosing Elizabeth as I also included Stephen Pelc. I seriously doubt the arrival of ANS-forth is the main reason people switched to C. The arrival of RISC, more research and marketing money is what caused that. > BTW: What does "commercial coverage" mean? I'm not familiar with that term. Do you mean Forth being used in commercial products? Nobody really cares what language was used or even what micro-processor was used --- they just buy boards and expect them to do whatever it is that they do --- the bean-counters need something to count, and boards are what they count. Maybe by "commercial coverage" you mean programming jobs --- there are none in Forth, and there haven't been in two decades --- ANS-Forth killed that. By commercial coverage I mean trying to get your product noticed in a crowded market. At least Elizabeth and Stephen are actively trying to SELL forth, whatever the flaws they have may be. Without marketing or some sort of visibility, it's just not going to happen. Totally agree that nobody really cares about language / CPU. Upside is that nobody cares which I see as an opportunity to market forth, downside is that people will have to move from what they know, which isn't easy. As much as marketing and business sucks, it's the ONLY way to get the word out and have people pay attention. -Mux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-04 23:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <52bb77a4-a943-4d1b-a8a2-26a12d38f95a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41747 |
On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 10:19:14 PM UTC-7, Mux wrote: > By commercial coverage I mean trying to get your product noticed in a crowded market. At least Elizabeth and Stephen are actively trying to SELL forth, whatever the flaws they have may be. Without marketing or some sort of visibility, it's just not going to happen. I wouldn't be bothered by Elizabeth Rather if she represented herself as a salesperson for Forth Inc. and stuck to selling SwiftForth (good luck with that, as it is a crappy product worth maybe $40 as shareware). Every corporation has their legion of idiot salespeople selling their products, and I just ignore them. What I find to be offensive is that she represents herself as the definer of what Forth is, and the leader for Forth programmers such as myself (actually, she says that I'm not a Forth programmer at all). That is grossly offensive! She has no right to represent herself as the leader for me! She has no right to represent herself as the leader for any Forth programmer anywhere outside of Forth Inc. --- this is a serious insult to all of the people who have written Forth programs successfully --- anybody who allows her to represent herself as their leader is a brown-noser. You said that Elizabeth Rather is "actively trying to SELL forth" --- you didn't say that she is actively trying to sell SwiftForth --- this is a complete failure of common-sense on your part, to believe that a corporate salesperson is selling the Forth language on your behalf --- I think you are an idiot, and Elizabeth Rather thinks so too (and she is laughing all the way to the bank). > As much as marketing and business sucks, it's the ONLY way to get the word out and have people pay attention. No, we don't need corporate salespeople to get the word out --- there is no corporate salesperson representing herself as the "leading expert" in C, yet C somehow manages to be popular --- Forthers have to be successful at writing programs that work, and the word will get around (for one thing, they will post help-wanted ads for Forth programmers as their businesses grow --- that would be a real attention-getter for those of us who like money). The C programmers are waiting to hear about success at Forth before they will consider Forth, and they are ignoring our bold marketing-genius with her idiotic advice on how to program, and her preposterous claim that she sets the standard for the entire Forth community --- they think that we are brown-nosed idiots that we allow her to represent us --- they are going to continue to ignore Forth so long as the Forth community continues to allow Elizabeth Rather get away with claiming to be a Forth programmer and even to be an expert. By "idiotic advice," I mean this kind of statement: "People are much too phobic about [global] variables. The cry, 'They aren't re-entrant' simply means you have to look at the whole application and how it is organized." This only works for toy programs. The phrase "the whole application" implies that the programmer has access to all of the source-code (there are no code libraries being used), and the program is small enough that the programmer can keep track of the entire thing in his head (he can use PAD and not worry that a function he is calling doesn't also use PAD, because the entire program only contains a dozen or so functions and he just looks at them to see if they use PAD or not). This is not how professional programs are written --- nobody has programmed like this since the days of line-number BASIC on the 8-bit computers of the early 1980s --- nobody has programmed *professionally* like this since the days of COBOL in the 1970s. And, here is another quote from Elizabeth Rather: "In 1971-2 I managed a group of COBOL programmers and wrote a fair amt of COBOL myself. Yes, it was an interesting learning experience!"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 07:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a824cf15-78b8-4b64-83e3-7109559ca7a0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41749 |
> You said that Elizabeth Rather is "actively trying to SELL forth" --- you didn't say that she is actively trying to sell SwiftForth --- this is a complete failure of common-sense on your part, to believe that a corporate salesperson is selling the Forth language on your behalf --- I think you are an idiot, and Elizabeth Rather thinks so too (and she is laughing all the way to the bank). > Ignoring Rickman's advice (for now), I think you're missing the point. Both Stephen and Elizabeth built a business around forth and in doing so are at least spreading awareness about forth. Consumers don't know / care how something works and what it was programmed in. Without anyone evangelizing forth (whatever their motivation) or giving people options, it's just not going to even be on people's radar. > No, we don't need corporate salespeople to get the word out --- there is no corporate salesperson representing herself as the "leading expert" in C, yet C somehow manages to be popular --- Forthers have to be successful at writing programs that work, and the word will get around (for one thing, they will post help-wanted ads for Forth programmers as their businesses grow --- that would be a real attention-getter for those of us who like money). > Oh, there are plenty of (self proclaimed) leading experts out in the field! Have you looked on Amazon for books on 'learn how to program C/C++'? Thousands of people are trying to cash in! Most of them probably with less knowledge about the language than a comp-sci freshman. My point is that if somebody types in 'learn to program', they're going to see those books first rather than forth related ones. So if anything, we need more people evangelizing forth :-) Your code, however well written, is locked inside a black box and consumers will never see it. You're ONE guy who might be the world's best forther but nobody will know it. The first step is to make people aware of forth, the second is to have people write kick-ass code that justifies companies to consider it for their projects. > The C programmers are waiting to hear about success at Forth before they will consider Forth, and they are ignoring our bold marketing-genius with her idiotic advice on how to program, and her preposterous claim that she sets the standard for the entire Forth community --- they think that we are brown-nosed idiots that we allow her to represent us --- they are going to continue to ignore Forth so long as the Forth community continues to allow Elizabeth Rather get away with claiming to be a Forth programmer and even to be an expert. > How about Stephen Pelc? He might not be as outspoken as Elizabeth but he's spreading the word. Negativity and bashing people doesn't help push forth. This group is a complete turn-off for anyone remotely interested in forth. > By "idiotic advice," I mean this kind of statement: > "People are much too phobic about [global] variables. The cry, 'They aren't re-entrant' simply means you have to look at the whole application and how it is organized." > > This only works for toy programs. The phrase "the whole application" implies that the programmer has access to all of the source-code (there are no code libraries being used), and the program is small enough that the programmer can keep track of the entire thing in his head (he can use PAD and not worry that a function he is calling doesn't also use PAD, because the entire program only contains a dozen or so functions and he just looks at them to see if they use PAD or not). This is not how professional programs are written --- nobody has programmed like this since the days of line-number BASIC on the 8-bit computers of the early 1980s --- nobody has programmed *professionally* like this since the days of COBOL in the 1970s. > > And, here is another quote from Elizabeth Rather: > "In 1971-2 I managed a group of COBOL programmers and wrote a fair amt of COBOL myself. Yes, it was an interesting learning experience!" Fair enough. Curious as to when those statements were made. Without that, it's kinda hard to put that in context. If there's one thing I've learned it's that technology alone doesn't sell products. Whether you like it or not, you need a way to make people aware. In this day and age of social media and what not, that's become easier than ever. I'd love to see you start a blog (time permitting) about forth programming and your experiences. -Mux
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 08:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6a423e09-f98a-4891-9816-39b4ca33365b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41749 |
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 2:31:42 AM UTC-4, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > ... it is a crappy product ... > ... What I find to be offensive ... > ... That is grossly offensive! ... > ... She has no right ... > ... this is a serious insult ... > ... brown-noser ... > ... a complete failure of common-sense on your part ... > ... I think you are an idiot ... > ... they think that we are brown-nosed idiots ... I'm new to Forth. :) I'm enjoying myself and learning a lot. I don't know what my future in the Forth community will be, but if anything is to drive me out, it'd be stuff like this. It reminds me a lot of the Smug Lisp Weenie and the Insufferable Haskell P***k, of the attitude that "my opinion and views are the only valid ones, and if you disagree with me, then you're an idiot and destructive and you don't belong around here." Ah well. I imagine I'll be called an idiot now, after which point I'll just let the matter drop. I just wanted to add my point of view on what is *really* destructive.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | foxaudioresearch@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 09:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c58642d3-81f4-4b50-a35d-b1fef92b1978@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41760 |
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 11:10:59 AM UTC-4, Alfred Singlestone wrote: > On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 2:31:42 AM UTC-4, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > > > ... it is a crappy product ... > > ... What I find to be offensive ... > > ... That is grossly offensive! ... > > ... She has no right ... > > ... this is a serious insult ... > > ... brown-noser ... > > ... a complete failure of common-sense on your part ... > > ... I think you are an idiot ... > > ... they think that we are brown-nosed idiots ... > > I'm new to Forth. :) I'm enjoying myself and learning a lot. I don't know what my future in the Forth community will be, but if anything is to drive me out, it'd be stuff like this. It reminds me a lot of the Smug Lisp Weenie and the Insufferable Haskell P***k, of the attitude that "my opinion and views are the only valid ones, and if you disagree with me, then you're an idiot and destructive and you don't belong around here." > > Ah well. I imagine I'll be called an idiot now, after which point I'll just let the matter drop. I just wanted to add my point of view on what is *really* destructive. Don't let these discussions colour your view. Forth is a remarkable tool to have in the toolbelt. Learning Forth will permanently affect how you code in other languages too. I find it also allowed me to develop a more intimate feel for machine internals by letting me explore low level concepts interactively. BF
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 09:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b6a0b5f5-9ea4-41dc-9c89-af6d83636202@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #41760 |
On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 11:10:59 AM UTC-4, Alfred Singlestone wrote: > On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 2:31:42 AM UTC-4, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > > > ... it is a crappy product ... > > ... What I find to be offensive ... > > ... That is grossly offensive! ... > > ... She has no right ... > > ... this is a serious insult ... > > ... brown-noser ... > > ... a complete failure of common-sense on your part ... > > ... I think you are an idiot ... > > ... they think that we are brown-nosed idiots ... > > I'm new to Forth. :) I'm enjoying myself and learning a lot. I don't know what my future in the Forth community will be, but if anything is to drive me out, it'd be stuff like this. It reminds me a lot of the Smug Lisp Weenie and the Insufferable Haskell P***k, of the attitude that "my opinion and views are the only valid ones, and if you disagree with me, then you're an idiot and destructive and you don't belong around here." > > Ah well. I imagine I'll be called an idiot now, after which point I'll just let the matter drop. I just wanted to add my point of view on what is *really* destructive. You are right! That's destructive! Do you know a way to encourage people to offer their opinions in a positive way? I really would appreciate if we could get some people together who support Forth, this great unified programming language and operating system, which I am successfully using since 1984, making a self employed living from it. And yes, we need education. That was the goal of my presentation at the EuroForth 2012 in Oxford, GB: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth/ef12/papers/bruehl.pdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 13:08 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <msf7ee$4cb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #41765 |
On 9/5/2015 12:07 PM, visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 11:10:59 AM UTC-4, Alfred Singlestone wrote: >> On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 2:31:42 AM UTC-4, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> ... it is a crappy product ... >>> ... What I find to be offensive ... >>> ... That is grossly offensive! ... >>> ... She has no right ... >>> ... this is a serious insult ... >>> ... brown-noser ... >>> ... a complete failure of common-sense on your part ... >>> ... I think you are an idiot ... >>> ... they think that we are brown-nosed idiots ... >> >> I'm new to Forth. :) I'm enjoying myself and learning a lot. I don't know what my future in the Forth community will be, but if anything is to drive me out, it'd be stuff like this. It reminds me a lot of the Smug Lisp Weenie and the Insufferable Haskell P***k, of the attitude that "my opinion and views are the only valid ones, and if you disagree with me, then you're an idiot and destructive and you don't belong around here." >> >> Ah well. I imagine I'll be called an idiot now, after which point I'll just let the matter drop. I just wanted to add my point of view on what is *really* destructive. > > You are right! That's destructive! > > Do you know a way to encourage people to offer their opinions in a positive way? > > I really would appreciate if we could get some people together who support Forth, this great unified programming language and operating system, which I am successfully using since 1984, making a self employed living from it. > > And yes, we need education. That was the goal of my presentation at the EuroForth 2012 in Oxford, GB: > http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth/ef12/papers/bruehl.pdf This is a good group. It is full of intelligent, experienced programmers and just plain good thinkers. The negative influences here are sporadic and don't really dominate the group. But they do create a point of focus that we tend to dwell on. The best way to deal with the negativity is to ignore it. It only achieves prominence when we give it our attention and bring it to the foreground. Trying to salve negativity with reason is fruitless, giving it any attention only encourages it more. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 16:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2015Sep5.183203@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #41760 |
Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> writes:
>I'm new to Forth. :) I'm enjoying myself and learning a lot.
Good for you.
> I don't know w=
>hat my future in the Forth community will be, but if anything is to drive m=
>e out, it'd be stuff like this. It reminds me a lot of the Smug Lisp Weenie=
> and the Insufferable Haskell P***k, of the attitude that "my opinion and v=
>iews are the only valid ones, and if you disagree with me, then you're an i=
>diot and destructive and you don't belong around here."
Well, most Usenet groups have their kooks, and in Usenet everybody has
to do the rating of posters and postings themselves, and all proper
Usenet clients have killfiles or other mechanisms for that purpose. I
think that Google Groups does not, so in that case just skip the
content manually, or switch to a proper Usenet client.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2015: http://www.rigwit.co.uk/EuroForth2015/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-05 22:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <msfik9$hoe$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #41769 |
Anton Ertl wrote: > Well, most Usenet groups have their kooks, and in Usenet everybody has > to do the rating of posters and postings themselves, and all proper > Usenet clients have killfiles or other mechanisms for that purpose. I > think that Google Groups does not, so in that case just skip the > content manually, or switch to a proper Usenet client. And for those who's provider dropped the Usenet feed (many today do): Eternal September just requires registration, but is free: http://www.eternal-september.org/ Sharing killfiles is one of the things on my to-do list for a net2o social network. Most social networks have a way to share friends (invitations), but no way to share enemies in an unmoderated way. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ* http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web