Groups > comp.lang.forth > #46543 > unrolled thread

BBC MicroBit has arrived - which Forth in Python is recommended for now?

Started by	JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com>
First post	2016-04-06 00:14 -0700
Last post	2016-08-12 11:11 -0400
Articles	20 on this page of 107 — 24 participants

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

Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →

#46543 — BBC MicroBit has arrived - which Forth in Python is recommended for now?

From	JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-06 00:14 -0700
Subject	BBC MicroBit has arrived - which Forth in Python is recommended for now?
Message-ID	<840cddee-749a-4aab-9644-4cfe42371840@googlegroups.com>

A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Until a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - is there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is not the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control the IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit INPUT value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ...
Any help appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/latest/.
Picture and video you can find at https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=ts. Has anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#46544

From	hughaguilar96@gmail.com
Date	2016-04-06 00:18 -0700
Message-ID	<148130bc-d514-495a-8ecd-63a2d2d5f5d4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46543

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 12:14:43 AM UTC-7, JUERGEN wrote:
> A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Until a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - is there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is not the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control the IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit INPUT value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ...
> Any help appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/latest/.
> Picture and video you can find at https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=ts. Has anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?

John Passaniti's claim to fame was that he wrote a Forth-like interpreter in Perl --- maybe you could try that --- makes as much sense as Forth in Python.

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

#46545

From	Martin Nicholas <reply-2016@mgn.org.uk>
Date	2016-04-06 10:13 +0100
Message-ID	<20160406101341.103b3cac@dsklinux>
In reply to	#46543

On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> wrote:

> A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Until
> a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - is
> there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is not
> the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control the
> IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit INPUT
> value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ... Any help
> appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/latest/.
> Picture and video you can find at
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=ts. Has
> anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?

It's a 32-bit ARM Cortex Processor (Cortex M0):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/microbit/specs
so a FORTH for this shouldn't be too elusive.

-- 
Regards,

Martin Nicholas.

E-mail: reply-201604@mgn.org.uk

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

#46546

From	JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-06 02:32 -0700
Message-ID	<1dbfd5e1-255e-4c9a-b49f-db6843ef9dc1@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46545

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 10:13:42 AM UTC+1, Martin Nicholas wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
> JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> wrote:
> 
> > A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Until
> > a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - is
> > there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is not
> > the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control the
> > IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit INPUT
> > value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ... Any help
> > appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/latest/.
> > Picture and video you can find at
> > https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=ts. Has
> > anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?
> 
> It's a 32-bit ARM Cortex Processor (Cortex M0):
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/microbit/specs
> so a FORTH for this shouldn't be too elusive.
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Martin Nicholas.
> 
> E-mail: reply-201604@mgn.org.uk

There might be a misunderstanding: There will be Forths running on the MicroBit - BUT this means that the original software has to be replaced  or at least partially. The idea here was to use the existing Python Programming Environment to have a small Forth running as an Application - leaving everything else as is.

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

#46548

From	Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-06 03:25 -0700
Message-ID	<97a228b0-bc2e-480f-8952-48b7361ee784@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46546

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 4:32:26 AM UTC-5, JUERGEN wrote:
> 
> There might be a misunderstanding: There will be Forths
> running on the MicroBit - BUT this means that the original
> software has to be replaced  or at least partially. The idea
> here was to use the existing Python Programming Environment
> to have a small Forth running as an Application - leaving
> everything else as is.
>

There's no well-known Forth-in-Python, so  I think you won't be
able to get very far with your idea.  Looking around the web I
see what you've probably found already:

https://github.com/jtauber/forth/blob/master/forth.py

http://openbookproject.net/py4fun/forth/forth.py

https://mail.python.org/pipermail/edu-sig/2000-October/000744.html

These are hopelessly incomplete.  Can't even call them toys.


Well, this looks a little bit better:

https://github.com/jdinuncio/pyforth/blob/master/pyforth/forthvm.py

Adding . and WORDS :

  @word_('.')
  def dot(forth):
      print forth._pop()
  
  @word_()
  def words(forth):
      for name in forth.dct: print name,

Interactively:

  $ python f.py
  words
  and forth_interpret >= >> <> over is_immediate /mod create ! or
  end & + * - , / . lit init exit swap branch dup rot- ; : = < >
  << @ <= 0branch >r immediate exec_ key word_from_name not [ ]
  interpret ^ ` bye word r> drop words | depth pick rdrop emit ~
  
  1 2 + .
   3


-- Julian

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

#46553

From	JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-06 05:07 -0700
Message-ID	<b2fbb457-6802-43da-90a9-3743f10ce6c6@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46548

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 11:25:19 AM UTC+1, Julian Fondren wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 4:32:26 AM UTC-5, JUERGEN wrote:
> > 
> > There might be a misunderstanding: There will be Forths
> > running on the MicroBit - BUT this means that the original
> > software has to be replaced  or at least partially. The idea
> > here was to use the existing Python Programming Environment
> > to have a small Forth running as an Application - leaving
> > everything else as is.
> >
> 
> There's no well-known Forth-in-Python, so  I think you won't be
> able to get very far with your idea.  Looking around the web I
> see what you've probably found already:
> 
> https://github.com/jtauber/forth/blob/master/forth.py
> 
> http://openbookproject.net/py4fun/forth/forth.py
> 
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/edu-sig/2000-October/000744.html
> 
> These are hopelessly incomplete.  Can't even call them toys.
> 
> 
> Well, this looks a little bit better:
> 
> https://github.com/jdinuncio/pyforth/blob/master/pyforth/forthvm.py
> 
> Adding . and WORDS :
> 
>   @word_('.')
>   def dot(forth):
>       print forth._pop()
>   
>   @word_()
>   def words(forth):
>       for name in forth.dct: print name,
> 
> Interactively:
> 
>   $ python f.py
>   words
>   and forth_interpret >= >> <> over is_immediate /mod create ! or
>   end & + * - , / . lit init exit swap branch dup rot- ; : = < >
>   << @ <= 0branch >r immediate exec_ key word_from_name not [ ]
>   interpret ^ ` bye word r> drop words | depth pick rdrop emit ~
>   
>   1 2 + .
>    3
> 
> 
> -- Julian

Thank you very much for all the links - brilliant. We now will probably have to enter the Python world,  as there will be probably more options - or tell them what is missing for a Starter Forth so they can add it - more extension  with the next update ...

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

#46555

From	Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-06 06:10 -0700
Message-ID	<57ac740e-0b2d-4f84-a95a-ca0c86dd5ff4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46546

On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 10:32:26 UTC+1, JUERGEN  wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 10:13:42 AM UTC+1, Martin Nicholas wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
> > JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Until
> > > a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - is
> > > there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is not
> > > the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control the
> > > IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit INPUT
> > > value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ... Any help
> > > appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/latest/.
> > > Picture and video you can find at
> > > https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=ts. Has
> > > anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?
> > 
> > It's a 32-bit ARM Cortex Processor (Cortex M0):
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/microbit/specs
> > so a FORTH for this shouldn't be too elusive.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Martin Nicholas.
> > 
> > E-mail: reply-201604@mgn.org.uk
> 
> There might be a misunderstanding: There will be Forths running on the MicroBit - BUT this means that the original software has to be replaced  or at least partially. The idea here was to use the existing Python Programming Environment to have a small Forth running as an Application - leaving everything else as is.

There's no point. Python is *insanely* easy, and all the libraries
for handling the hardware will already be there. Might as well just
use them and enjoy yourself.

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

#46556

From	Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-06 07:26 -0700
Message-ID	<7fc9e3d2-1866-4db2-85b5-5262a9c68017@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46555

miercuri, 6 aprilie 2016, 16:10:31 UTC+3, Mark Wills a scris:
> On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 10:32:26 UTC+1, JUERGEN  wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 10:13:42 AM UTC+1, Martin Nicholas wrote:
> > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
> > > JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Until
> > > > a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - is
> > > > there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is not
> > > > the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control the
> > > > IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit INPUT
> > > > value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ... Any help
> > > > appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/latest/.
> > > > Picture and video you can find at
> > > > https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=ts. Has
> > > > anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?
> > > 
> > > It's a 32-bit ARM Cortex Processor (Cortex M0):
> > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/microbit/specs
> > > so a FORTH for this shouldn't be too elusive.
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Regards,
> > > 
> > > Martin Nicholas.
> > > 
> > > E-mail: reply-201604@mgn.org.uk
> > 
> > There might be a misunderstanding: There will be Forths running on the MicroBit - BUT this means that the original software has to be replaced  or at least partially. The idea here was to use the existing Python Programming Environment to have a small Forth running as an Application - leaving everything else as is.
> 
> There's no point. Python is *insanely* easy, and all the libraries
> for handling the hardware will already be there. Might as well just
> use them and enjoy yourself.

Is the python resident (micropython) or is it cross-compiling?

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

#46557

From	Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-06 07:38 -0700
Message-ID	<ee3818c0-3037-45b5-b49c-2638868a5d36@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46555

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 8:10:31 AM UTC-5, Mark Wills wrote:
> There's no point.

Forth is the point.  If you'd rather use it, personally, then
why not share why you would with other people?

> Python is *insanely* easy,

Python's easiness is a meme.  Guido worked on teaching
languages.  He did some research on teaching languages (case
insensitive is better; integer / is bad -- a lot of advice that
Python itself ignores).  He had ideals of Python being a
teaching language.  So Python's become a teaching language,
because people bought into the meme and produced the materials
and put it before kids.  Good for them.  And since Python isn't
without redeeming qualities, OK for the kids.  It's better than
BASIC.  And COBOL.  And RPG.  And Fortran.  And esoteric
minimal languages.  And languages that don't have
implementations or documentation anymore.  OK, I think that's
close to an exhaustive list of languages Python isn't grossly
inferior to.  For teaching purposes it's also better than any
language where compilation takes much time, or that can't be
interactive.

Guido is a terrible language designer, and Python has continued
to stray from his original goals.  It didn't even have +=
because he thought additional operators were confusing.  Now it
has += and similar.  Now it also has list comprehensions, and
decorators (@word_() is an example in my previous post) and
generators and all kinds of crap.  It's a language of broken
concepts because Guido didn't like or didn't understand or
couldn't implement them (lambdas, lexical variables) and new
flashy concepts that don't fit with the language, don't add any
capabilities to the language, and are harder to work with than
their counterparts in very similar languages (list
comprehensions, generators, decorators).

The pain of the 2/3 version split in the community is purely
due to stupid and ugly decisions and then Guido not being able
to escape them without breaking them.  With other languages the
stupid decisions hang around forever but just get ignored, and
your old code still works.

If you want a teaching language that's not Forth, it should be
JavaScript.  Its warts are too ignoreable, its core language is
too clean (it's not "X is an '''acceptable lisp''' lol"; it's
"Brendan Eich wanted Scheme but couldn't sell Scheme's
syntax"), object literals are too good (just look from them to
Python's objects, fast, and try to keep your gorge down), and
the browser is too prominent for you to use anything else.

-- Julian

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

#46559

From	JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-06 08:08 -0700
Message-ID	<73d5c5b4-63da-4761-97c4-2d183ead6d9b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46557

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 3:38:21 PM UTC+1, Julian Fondren wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 8:10:31 AM UTC-5, Mark Wills wrote:
> > There's no point.
> 
> Forth is the point.  If you'd rather use it, personally, then
> why not share why you would with other people?
> 
> > Python is *insanely* easy,
> 
> Python's easiness is a meme.  Guido worked on teaching
> languages.  He did some research on teaching languages (case
> insensitive is better; integer / is bad -- a lot of advice that
> Python itself ignores).  He had ideals of Python being a
> teaching language.  So Python's become a teaching language,
> because people bought into the meme and produced the materials
> and put it before kids.  Good for them.  And since Python isn't
> without redeeming qualities, OK for the kids.  It's better than
> BASIC.  And COBOL.  And RPG.  And Fortran.  And esoteric
> minimal languages.  And languages that don't have
> implementations or documentation anymore.  OK, I think that's
> close to an exhaustive list of languages Python isn't grossly
> inferior to.  For teaching purposes it's also better than any
> language where compilation takes much time, or that can't be
> interactive.
> 
> Guido is a terrible language designer, and Python has continued
> to stray from his original goals.  It didn't even have +=
> because he thought additional operators were confusing.  Now it
> has += and similar.  Now it also has list comprehensions, and
> decorators (@word_() is an example in my previous post) and
> generators and all kinds of crap.  It's a language of broken
> concepts because Guido didn't like or didn't understand or
> couldn't implement them (lambdas, lexical variables) and new
> flashy concepts that don't fit with the language, don't add any
> capabilities to the language, and are harder to work with than
> their counterparts in very similar languages (list
> comprehensions, generators, decorators).
> 
> The pain of the 2/3 version split in the community is purely
> due to stupid and ugly decisions and then Guido not being able
> to escape them without breaking them.  With other languages the
> stupid decisions hang around forever but just get ignored, and
> your old code still works.
> 
> If you want a teaching language that's not Forth, it should be
> JavaScript.  Its warts are too ignoreable, its core language is
> too clean (it's not "X is an '''acceptable lisp''' lol"; it's
> "Brendan Eich wanted Scheme but couldn't sell Scheme's
> syntax"), object literals are too good (just look from them to
> Python's objects, fast, and try to keep your gorge down), and
> the browser is too prominent for you to use anything else.
> 
> 
> -- Julian

I forget about Python for now- why learn another one? And I had a go and gave up. A little typo and you find out after compilation - so a NO for me - and there has to be an agreed target so opinions make sense. Mine is to have Forth available on the MicroBit - Mecrisp - VFX , but alternatively the Python based Forth as Application is an interesting play alternative - probably not for 98% of the people here - but they are not the target anyway  - I was asking for help.

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

#46561

From	Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-06 08:18 -0700
Message-ID	<c63f4fca-a268-44d4-8e99-d8d64a3c1989@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46559

miercuri, 6 aprilie 2016, 18:08:14 UTC+3, JUERGEN a scris:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 3:38:21 PM UTC+1, Julian Fondren wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 8:10:31 AM UTC-5, Mark Wills wrote:
> > > There's no point.
> > 
> > Forth is the point.  If you'd rather use it, personally, then
> > why not share why you would with other people?
> > 
> > > Python is *insanely* easy,
> > 
> > Python's easiness is a meme.  Guido worked on teaching
> > languages.  He did some research on teaching languages (case
> > insensitive is better; integer / is bad -- a lot of advice that
> > Python itself ignores).  He had ideals of Python being a
> > teaching language.  So Python's become a teaching language,
> > because people bought into the meme and produced the materials
> > and put it before kids.  Good for them.  And since Python isn't
> > without redeeming qualities, OK for the kids.  It's better than
> > BASIC.  And COBOL.  And RPG.  And Fortran.  And esoteric
> > minimal languages.  And languages that don't have
> > implementations or documentation anymore.  OK, I think that's
> > close to an exhaustive list of languages Python isn't grossly
> > inferior to.  For teaching purposes it's also better than any
> > language where compilation takes much time, or that can't be
> > interactive.
> > 
> > Guido is a terrible language designer, and Python has continued
> > to stray from his original goals.  It didn't even have +=
> > because he thought additional operators were confusing.  Now it
> > has += and similar.  Now it also has list comprehensions, and
> > decorators (@word_() is an example in my previous post) and
> > generators and all kinds of crap.  It's a language of broken
> > concepts because Guido didn't like or didn't understand or
> > couldn't implement them (lambdas, lexical variables) and new
> > flashy concepts that don't fit with the language, don't add any
> > capabilities to the language, and are harder to work with than
> > their counterparts in very similar languages (list
> > comprehensions, generators, decorators).
> > 
> > The pain of the 2/3 version split in the community is purely
> > due to stupid and ugly decisions and then Guido not being able
> > to escape them without breaking them.  With other languages the
> > stupid decisions hang around forever but just get ignored, and
> > your old code still works.
> > 
> > If you want a teaching language that's not Forth, it should be
> > JavaScript.  Its warts are too ignoreable, its core language is
> > too clean (it's not "X is an '''acceptable lisp''' lol"; it's
> > "Brendan Eich wanted Scheme but couldn't sell Scheme's
> > syntax"), object literals are too good (just look from them to
> > Python's objects, fast, and try to keep your gorge down), and
> > the browser is too prominent for you to use anything else.
> > 
> > 
> > -- Julian
> 
> I forget about Python for now- why learn another one? And I had a go and gave up. A little typo and you find out after compilation - so a NO for me - and there has to be an agreed target so opinions make sense. Mine is to have Forth available on the MicroBit - Mecrisp - VFX , but alternatively the Python based Forth as Application is an interesting play alternative - probably not for 98% of the people here - but they are not the target anyway  - I was asking for help.

Is the hardware open? Do we know the schematic, the parts etc?
How can the cpu be programmed?
Is there a BLE stack that should be compiled with an application or is it
a library or something?
Many questions to be answered...

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

#48213

From	lawrencedo99@gmail.com
Date	2016-06-15 21:34 -0700
Message-ID	<5fba7f94-3707-45ce-885f-ba872d5d02e5@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46557

On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 2:38:21 AM UTC+12, Julian Fondren wrote:
> Python's easiness is a meme.

Do you mean “myth”?

> Guido is a terrible language designer, and Python has continued
> to stray from his original goals.  It didn't even have +=
> because he thought additional operators were confusing.  Now it
> has += and similar.  Now it also has list comprehensions, and
> decorators (@word_() is an example in my previous post) and
> generators and all kinds of crap.

I don’t understand what you mean by “crap”. What are you comparing it with? Looking at Java, for example, the core Python language is maybe one-fifth the size, and manages to include useful concepts like operator overloading, which Java couldn’t manage. Python does introspection with 4 built-in functions, while Java needs several classes and dozens of methods to achieve the same.

The strength of Python is evident in how add-on libraries make use of features of the core language to do their stuff.

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

#48223

From	hughaguilar96@gmail.com
Date	2016-06-16 00:43 -0700
Message-ID	<472e447c-d4b4-4e58-86d6-66dcc2042458@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#48213

On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 9:34:34 PM UTC-7, lawren...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 2:38:21 AM UTC+12, Julian Fondren wrote:
> > Python's easiness is a meme.
> 
> Do you mean “myth”?
> 
> > Guido is a terrible language designer, and Python has continued
> > to stray from his original goals.  It didn't even have +=
> > because he thought additional operators were confusing.  Now it
> > has += and similar.  Now it also has list comprehensions, and
> > decorators (@word_() is an example in my previous post) and
> > generators and all kinds of crap.
> 
> I don’t understand what you mean by “crap”. What are you comparing it with? Looking at Java, for example, the core Python language is maybe one-fifth the size, and manages to include useful concepts like operator overloading, which Java couldn’t manage. Python does introspection with 4 built-in functions, while Java needs several classes and dozens of methods to achieve the same.
> 
> The strength of Python is evident in how add-on libraries make use of features of the core language to do their stuff.

I don't program in Python, but I've heard a lot of good things about it --- I wouldn't call it "crap" --- Python is something I should learn, as it is the most popular scripting-language in the world (it has largely supplanted Perl, which used to hold this title).

This thread started out by asking: "which Forth in Python is recommended?" I still consider writing Forth in Python to be an idiotic idea --- I felt the same way about John Passaniti's claim to fame, which was writing a Forth-like interpreter in Perl --- this is not what scripting languages are for!

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

#48360

From	Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com>
Date	2016-06-19 03:54 -0700
Message-ID	<db815218-0d22-4883-808b-db6f04694549@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#48213

On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 11:34:34 PM UTC-5, lawren...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 2:38:21 AM UTC+12, Julian Fondren wrote:
> > Python's easiness is a meme.
> 
> Do you mean “myth”?
> 

No.  Memes can drive people fulfill them.  Python's abundance of learning
material grants it a measure of easiness, and it only has all this learning
material because it's "easy".

> > Guido is a terrible language designer, and Python has continued
> > to stray from his original goals.  It didn't even have +=
> > because he thought additional operators were confusing.  Now it
> > has += and similar.  Now it also has list comprehensions, and
> > decorators (@word_() is an example in my previous post) and
> > generators and all kinds of crap.
> 
> I don’t understand what you mean by “crap”.

I mean "et cetera".  Do you understand what's been listed already?

> What are you comparing it with? Looking at Java,

Jesus Christ!  Why not compare it to Brainfuck?  Comparing a language to Java
is like comparing a random boat to a boat that comes with its own exclusive-use
ocean.  Just grasping Java's incompatible ecosystem is more effort than
learning the language.  Are you using make?  you fool!  You need ant, maven.
Are you using <any editor anyone would naturally use>?  you fool!  You need
Eclipse, IntelliJ.

Mainly, I've compared Python with earlier versions of itself.  Today it would
be reasonable to compare it with Perl or PHP.  And as awful as PHP is, I'd take
it over *Python*, just to avoid the version fissure that drives people to
pretend that Python doesn't have any convenient I/O functions.

> The strength of Python is evident in how add-on libraries make use of features of the core language to do their stuff.

This is like saying "that man's strength is evident in how he uses muscles to
move himself around".  Oh really?  How... unique.

-- Julian

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

#46558

From	JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-06 07:55 -0700
Message-ID	<3b01022e-534d-449d-b4d7-ddde05c90bf7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46555

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 2:10:31 PM UTC+1, Mark Wills wrote:
> On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 10:32:26 UTC+1, JUERGEN  wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 10:13:42 AM UTC+1, Martin Nicholas wrote:
> > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
> > > JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Until
> > > > a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - is
> > > > there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is not
> > > > the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control the
> > > > IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit INPUT
> > > > value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ... Any help
> > > > appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/latest/.
> > > > Picture and video you can find at
> > > > https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=ts. Has
> > > > anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?
> > > 
> > > It's a 32-bit ARM Cortex Processor (Cortex M0):
> > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/microbit/specs
> > > so a FORTH for this shouldn't be too elusive.
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Regards,
> > > 
> > > Martin Nicholas.
> > > 
> > > E-mail: reply-201604@mgn.org.uk
> > 
> > There might be a misunderstanding: There will be Forths running on the MicroBit - BUT this means that the original software has to be replaced  or at least partially. The idea here was to use the existing Python Programming Environment to have a small Forth running as an Application - leaving everything else as is.
> 
> There's no point. Python is *insanely* easy, and all the libraries
> for handling the hardware will already be there. Might as well just
> use them and enjoy yourself.

I do disagree - either via the PC or the Mobile or a cheap display and a keyboard. I want to have Forth on the MicroBit - if this is not for you - fine.

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

#46560

From	Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-06 08:13 -0700
Message-ID	<b8882bb3-dc41-4b09-a8eb-e146e9087e72@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46558

> > There's no point. Python is *insanely* easy, and all the libraries
> > for handling the hardware will already be there. Might as well just
> > use them and enjoy yourself.
> 
I don't know where it comes this idea from - the python is easy.
It's a high level language that hides A LOT of complexity.
Given that fact, some complex things are easy. But do we want
to teach kids that some hard things are easy? This is just a lie
in their face.
I would teach kids simple things that are simple things. Forth
is good at that. This way the kids will get a grasp of what things
are easy and what not.

Also, their site is tiresome after 5mins (to me). Too much advertising.
They probably want to bind million of kids to their site. Ugly.
Forth will be much independent.

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

#46563

From	JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-06 10:17 -0700
Message-ID	<13ce011b-4e43-4678-9b4f-8d44ed8062f3@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46560

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 4:13:03 PM UTC+1, Raimond Dragomir wrote:
> > > There's no point. Python is *insanely* easy, and all the libraries
> > > for handling the hardware will already be there. Might as well just
> > > use them and enjoy yourself.
> > 
> I don't know where it comes this idea from - the python is easy.
> It's a high level language that hides A LOT of complexity.
> Given that fact, some complex things are easy. But do we want
> to teach kids that some hard things are easy? This is just a lie
> in their face.
> I would teach kids simple things that are simple things. Forth
> is good at that. This way the kids will get a grasp of what things
> are easy and what not.
> 
> Also, their site is tiresome after 5mins (to me). Too much advertising.
> They probably want to bind million of kids to their site. Ugly.
> Forth will be much independent.

Completly agreed - a few lines of interactive Forth and the LED is on - more complex stuff comes later. In many cases complexity is hidden nowadays - so you do not really understand what is happening. 
For this reason we started MicroBox : 1 chip, 1 resistor, 1 connector to the USBtoTTL, 1 PCB - and you start programming in Forth - add some LEDs and switches and start controlling them. Just needs an 8 Bit Port on the MSP430G2553. I want the same entry pacckage for the MicroBit.

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

#46568

From	hughaguilar96@gmail.com
Date	2016-04-07 00:17 -0700
Message-ID	<2fed9c46-cb79-4a93-b209-adcc40dd4f7d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46560

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 8:13:03 AM UTC-7, Raimond Dragomir wrote:
> > > There's no point. Python is *insanely* easy, and all the libraries
> > > for handling the hardware will already be there. Might as well just
> > > use them and enjoy yourself.
> > 
> I don't know where it comes this idea from - the python is easy.
> It's a high level language that hides A LOT of complexity.
> Given that fact, some complex things are easy. But do we want
> to teach kids that some hard things are easy? This is just a lie
> in their face.
> I would teach kids simple things that are simple things. Forth
> is good at that. This way the kids will get a grasp of what things
> are easy and what not.

A lot of Python programming involves people who know very little about programming writing scripts around code-libraries that are written in C (presumably by somebody who does know how to program). This is my understanding of Python anyway --- I don't program in Python.

What do "we" want to teach kids? Well, it is the parent's responsibility to decide what they want their kids to learn. As a practical matter, there are jobs available in Python but not in Forth, and most parents want their kids to be employable.

Personally, I enjoy programming that solves problems. The problems don't have to be practical either. For example, I have LowDraw.4th in the novice package. Calculating the probabilities of Low-Draw poker is not very practical (nobody plays the game anymore, not even in Gardenia CA). I enjoyed writing the program though. The program does a recursive-descent traversal over every possible Low-Draw hand --- realistically, Python would be too slow even given today's powerful computers --- this isn't what Python is all about.

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

#46571

From	Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-07 01:27 -0700
Message-ID	<6a4b6684-3cb3-40f1-920d-12338b0a02f0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#46558

On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 15:55:32 UTC+1, JUERGEN  wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 2:10:31 PM UTC+1, Mark Wills wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 10:32:26 UTC+1, JUERGEN  wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 10:13:42 AM UTC+1, Martin Nicholas wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Until
> > > > > a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - is
> > > > > there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is not
> > > > > the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control the
> > > > > IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit INPUT
> > > > > value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ... Any help
> > > > > appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/latest/.
> > > > > Picture and video you can find at
> > > > > https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=ts. Has
> > > > > anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?
> > > > 
> > > > It's a 32-bit ARM Cortex Processor (Cortex M0):
> > > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/microbit/specs
> > > > so a FORTH for this shouldn't be too elusive.
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > 
> > > > Martin Nicholas.
> > > > 
> > > > E-mail: reply-201604@mgn.org.uk
> > > 
> > > There might be a misunderstanding: There will be Forths running on the MicroBit - BUT this means that the original software has to be replaced  or at least partially. The idea here was to use the existing Python Programming Environment to have a small Forth running as an Application - leaving everything else as is.
> > 
> > There's no point. Python is *insanely* easy, and all the libraries
> > for handling the hardware will already be there. Might as well just
> > use them and enjoy yourself.
> 
> I do disagree - either via the PC or the Mobile or a cheap display and a keyboard. I want to have Forth on the MicroBit - if this is not for you - fine.

I'm all for a Forth on the MicroBit - why not? I just meant there's
no point in getting a Forth-in-python running just to control the
I/Os and LEDs as you mentioned in your first post. Might as well just
just use Python for that and have some fun!

But getting a Forth on it? Sure, why not. Then we can have some
proper fun ;-)

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

#46572

From	Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl>
Date	2016-04-07 09:29 +0000
Message-ID	<57062896$0$5869$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
In reply to	#46571

Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> writes:

>On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 15:55:32 UTC+1, JUERGEN  wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 2:10:31 PM UTC+1, Mark Wills wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, 6 April 2016 10:32:26 UTC+1, JUERGEN  wrote:
>> > > On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 10:13:42 AM UTC+1, Martin Nicholas wro=
>te:
>> > > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
>> > > > JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> wrote:
>> > > >=20
>> > > > > A MicroBit has arrived on my desk, but no Forth yet available. Un=
>til
>> > > > > a real Forth is running, and as Python is a supported language - =
>is
>> > > > > there a Forth out there in Python I could load and run? Speed is =
>not
>> > > > > the issue for now nor is completeness. I mainly want to control t=
>he
>> > > > > IOs, and the 25 LEDs are just enough to display ok, or a 4 Bit IN=
>PUT
>> > > > > value, a 4 bit OUTPUT value - and 3 levels of Stack ... Any help
>> > > > > appreciated. http://microbit-micropython.readthedocs.org/en/lates=
>t/.
>> > > > > Picture and video you can find at
>> > > > > https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH/?fref=3Dts. Has
>> > > > > anybody re-written JonesForth in Python?
>> > > >=20
>> > > > It's a 32-bit ARM Cortex Processor (Cortex M0):
>> > > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/microbit/specs
>> > > > so a FORTH for this shouldn't be too elusive.
>> > > >=20
>> > > > --=20
>> > > > Regards,
>> > > >=20
>> > > > Martin Nicholas.
>> > > >=20
>> > > > E-mail: reply-201604@mgn.org.uk
>> > >=20
>> > > There might be a misunderstanding: There will be Forths running on th=
>e MicroBit - BUT this means that the original software has to be replaced  =
>or at least partially. The idea here was to use the existing Python Program=
>ming Environment to have a small Forth running as an Application - leaving =
>everything else as is.
>> >=20
>> > There's no point. Python is *insanely* easy, and all the libraries
>> > for handling the hardware will already be there. Might as well just
>> > use them and enjoy yourself.
>>=20
>> I do disagree - either via the PC or the Mobile or a cheap display and a =
>keyboard. I want to have Forth on the MicroBit - if this is not for you - f=
>ine.

>I'm all for a Forth on the MicroBit - why not? I just meant there's
>no point in getting a Forth-in-python running just to control the
>I/Os and LEDs as you mentioned in your first post. Might as well just
>just use Python for that and have some fun!

>But getting a Forth on it? Sure, why not. Then we can have some
>proper fun ;-)

The first thing to know is whether the Forth -compiler must be
an ELF format or (MS) .com format. The other possibility is that the whole
Microbit is in fact one single turnkey program, with a built in
interpreter for Python.
It took me more than 5 minutes to not find that information on the
Microbit website, which warrants the conclusion that it is a
programmer-hostile environment.

An environment like ARM-android accepts ELF files. There is a gforth
ELF-arm, and shortly there will be ciforth-ELF-arm. (The last hurdle
was compiling turnkeys to executable files.)

Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

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

Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →

csiph-web

BBC MicroBit has arrived - which Forth in Python is recommended for now?

Contents

#46543 — BBC MicroBit has arrived - which Forth in Python is recommended for now?

#46544

#46545

#46546

#46548

#46553

#46555

#46556

#46557

#46559

#46561

#48213

#48223

#48360

#46558

#46560

#46563

#46568

#46571

#46572