Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #56541 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-01 12:10 -0400 |
| Last post | 2017-04-08 01:37 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 202 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 12:10 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-01 17:06 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 16:37 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 19:21 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 17:16 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:26 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:51 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 18:50 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 19:18 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:29 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 22:01 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-02 21:46 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:54 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-02 22:26 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 08:34 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-01 18:47 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:28 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 04:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-02 15:44 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:56 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:16 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:38 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 16:42 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-08 12:41 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 17:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 22:03 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-01 22:56 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:32 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:45 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:03 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:31 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:35 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:37 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 19:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:58 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:06 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-03 10:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 01:21 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2017-04-02 13:58 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 11:16 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 19:38 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:10 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-02 22:02 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-02 15:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 23:48 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 23:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 10:23 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-03 15:56 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-03 20:57 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-03 08:08 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-02 19:22 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 22:46 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 20:38 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 07:07 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 00:17 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 07:41 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 20:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 00:15 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-04 02:08 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 03:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-04 06:25 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 20:19 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 17:33 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-08 18:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 19:03 +0000
Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 08:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? joel.rees@gmail.com - 2017-04-06 03:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 15:46 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-07 18:59 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:57 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:37 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:31 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:45 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-07 20:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:31 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 06:18 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? mhx@iae.nl - 2017-04-08 03:01 -0700
Starting Forth (was: Is there a free version ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 12:34 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 15:53 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 09:36 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-07 20:30 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 17:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 01:22 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 23:01 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-08 23:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 17:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 18:18 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 23:05 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 03:11 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-09 12:24 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 14:16 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 13:50 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-10 06:19 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-10 11:20 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 18:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 19:42 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-11 15:26 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 10:24 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:42 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 11:28 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 07:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 14:30 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 16:53 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 14:44 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-09 08:19 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 00:26 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 21:39 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 07:47 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 21:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:18 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-10 11:41 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-10 07:57 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 12:27 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 15:57 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2017-04-11 13:24 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-12 01:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 23:37 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 16:59 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 17:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:32 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 12:09 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 12:18 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 15:54 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 01:47 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 02:33 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? mhx@iae.nl - 2017-04-11 04:12 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:14 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:02 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:24 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:09 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 21:37 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 15:59 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? john <anon@example.com> - 2017-04-12 17:12 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:19 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:54 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 21:12 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:19 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 00:27 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:32 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:49 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 21:37 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:53 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:25 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:27 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:52 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:53 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 03:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 00:22 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-04-13 15:59 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:07 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:58 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 02:54 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 18:29 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 07:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 08:04 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 23:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:00 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-10 09:21 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:49 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-10 10:26 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 03:10 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:55 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-07 12:41 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:48 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 14:03 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 21:21 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-04-08 03:28 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 02:39 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 12:45 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 00:26 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 14:38 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:20 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 16:17 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-04-08 12:49 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 01:01 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 10:06 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-09 19:37 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 16:09 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 17:26 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? minforth@arcor.de - 2017-04-09 22:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 22:44 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 18:47 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 12:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-10 10:18 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 16:14 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 18:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-11 03:21 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-12 04:42 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 13:51 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 14:04 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-08 09:10 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-08 12:50 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:31 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2017-04-07 20:50 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 22:04 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2017-04-07 21:22 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:37 -0400
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 10:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ocg2vc$508$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56980 |
On 4/10/2017 2:23 AM, JUERGEN wrote: > On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 4:04:49 PM UTC+1, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: >> On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 7:23:07 AM UTC-7, JUERGEN wrote: >>> Darin, I went through the same experience. I could not find a tutorial where there wasgood compatibility with an existing Forth - preferably a free one to learn and a commercial version - MPE VFX did the job. >>> I started with Starting Forth, and go back there when needed. >>> And I could not find a tutorial for self study for the level I wanted - until I found Leo Wong's Simple Forth. >>> As I went through it, I used the examples, extended and documented them >>> And the FORTH LITE TUTORIAL was born - compatible with VFX, Swiftforth, gforth and it seems as well some others. >>> A couple of hundred Forth words frightens people off - so I made up the A START WITH FORTH documentation - 35 words are sufficient to do something useful and see how it hangs together. And from there you can jump to Leon's documentation or the Forth LITE Tutorial. >>> Stephen Pelcs book is very good and well documented and in the eBook I added the links where to find the word in the eBook. >> >> Darin --- you need some background information: >> Juergen Pintaske works as a salesman for MPE and Stephen Pelc is his boss, which is why he consider's Stephen Pelc's book to be "very good" --- he wrote that Forth LITE Tutorial to help sell VFX --- there is no evidence to indicate that he has ever written any Forth code whatsoever. >> >> I'm quite impressed that you have written some code. :-) Almost everybody who gets involved in ANS-Forth promotes themselves to being a teacher without bothering to first learn anything themselves. It is very rare to find an ANS-Forth expert who has ever written a program in ANS-Forth --- not even a simple one such as that ARENA.4TH game that I posted --- so you have already written infinitely more ANS-Forth code than most ANS-Forth experts. >> >> My style of teaching is a lot different than everybody else's. I write code that I consider to be of good style and I make it available as an example. My novice-package, in addition to providing tools for writing programs, also provides several example programs ranging from novice-level to intermediate-level. To me, writing programs is the essence of programming --- I don't really understand the point of being involved in programming, and claiming to be an expert, without actually programming --- well, actually, I do: it is called "sales" and they get a commission or at least an ego-boo. >> >> A lot of the time, I'm not actually teaching --- I don't really care very much if other people learn or not --- I just write code because programming is a lot of fun (I've been programming in Forth since 1984 and I enjoy doing it). >> >> So, keep on writing Forth code! You can learn from my example program, or just develop your own style. Give "Starting Forth" a quick read, but don't waste time typing in the examples and worrying if they are exactly compatible with any ANS-Forth system --- it is not a very good book because, like all Forth Inc. books, it fails to discuss structs or data-structures built at run-time in the heap --- you are better off to write your own programs rather than type in code snippets written by Charles Moore in the 1970s on a computer that had so little RAM that it couldn't support a heap. > > HATE CRIME AGAIN ON CLF - Hugh Aguilar Typical Excrements - The Biggest Forth Killer Has Spoken Again. The same Bullshit as usual. He does not have a clue about the context but pees again all over the community. Your message is pretty much as destructive to this newsgroup as is Hugh's. When Hugh posts one of his rants, it comes across as just that, the ravings of a near-lunatic. Unfortunately, your post is so extreme you also come across as a near-lunatic. There is no one who will read your post and see that Hugh is next to a lunatic who didn't already understand that from reading his post. Your post did nothing to help the situation and makes you look pretty bad too. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 09:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MNSdneiWxbtMCXbFnZ2dnUU7-SGdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56998 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/10/2017 2:23 AM, JUERGEN wrote: <much stuff deleted> >> HATE CRIME AGAIN ON CLF - Hugh Aguilar Typical Excrements - The >> Biggest Forth Killer Has Spoken Again. The same Bullshit as >> usual. He does not have a clue about the context but pees again all >> over the community. > > Your message is pretty much as destructive to this newsgroup as is > Hugh's. When Hugh posts one of his rants, it comes across as just that, > the ravings of a near-lunatic. Unfortunately, your post is so extreme > you also come across as a near-lunatic. There is no one who will read > your post and see that Hugh is next to a lunatic who didn't already > understand that from reading his post. Your post did nothing to help > the situation and makes you look pretty bad too. And yet you quoted the thing in full. Why was that? Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 10:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ocg5s2$i01$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #57000 |
On 4/10/2017 10:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 4/10/2017 2:23 AM, JUERGEN wrote: > > <much stuff deleted> > >>> HATE CRIME AGAIN ON CLF - Hugh Aguilar Typical Excrements - The >>> Biggest Forth Killer Has Spoken Again. The same Bullshit as >>> usual. He does not have a clue about the context but pees again all >>> over the community. >> >> Your message is pretty much as destructive to this newsgroup as is >> Hugh's. When Hugh posts one of his rants, it comes across as just that, >> the ravings of a near-lunatic. Unfortunately, your post is so extreme >> you also come across as a near-lunatic. There is no one who will read >> your post and see that Hugh is next to a lunatic who didn't already >> understand that from reading his post. Your post did nothing to help >> the situation and makes you look pretty bad too. > > And yet you quoted the thing in full. Why was that? I don't follow your point? I quoted the context of Jergen's message. Why is that bad? Both messages are out there, nothing I do can change that. You quoted Jergen's message which is not really any better than Hugh's. Why was that??? \:S -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 10:26 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <9_-dnTRa4uqvOXbFnZ2dnUU7-L3NnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #57001 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/10/2017 10:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Your message is pretty much as destructive to this newsgroup as is
>>> Hugh's. When Hugh posts one of his rants, it comes across as just that,
>>> the ravings of a near-lunatic. Unfortunately, your post is so extreme
>>> you also come across as a near-lunatic. There is no one who will read
>>> your post and see that Hugh is next to a lunatic who didn't already
>>> understand that from reading his post. Your post did nothing to help
>>> the situation and makes you look pretty bad too.
>>
>> And yet you quoted the thing in full. Why was that?
>
> I don't follow your point? I quoted the context of Jergen's
> message. Why is that bad?
Oh Lord, do you really need to be told that you should trim replies?
- Be brief without being overly terse. When replying to a message,
include enough original material to be understood but no more. It
is extremely bad form to simply reply to a message by including
all the previous message: edit out all the irrelevant material.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
> Both messages are out there, nothing I do can change that. You
> quoted Jergen's message which is not really any better than Hugh's.
> Why was that???
Because your reply to Juergen would have made little sense without it,
and I think that my reply to you would also have made little sense
without it.
If you keep reposting stuff from people who are in many people's
killfiles, you'll end up those killfiles too. It's a shame, because
you sometimes say interesting things. Your call.
Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 03:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ochvbp$prs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #57004 |
On 4/10/2017 11:26 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 4/10/2017 10:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Your message is pretty much as destructive to this newsgroup as is >>>> Hugh's. When Hugh posts one of his rants, it comes across as just that, >>>> the ravings of a near-lunatic. Unfortunately, your post is so extreme >>>> you also come across as a near-lunatic. There is no one who will read >>>> your post and see that Hugh is next to a lunatic who didn't already >>>> understand that from reading his post. Your post did nothing to help >>>> the situation and makes you look pretty bad too. >>> >>> And yet you quoted the thing in full. Why was that? >> >> I don't follow your point? I quoted the context of Jergen's >> message. Why is that bad? > > Oh Lord, do you really need to be told that you should trim replies? Oh Lord, do you really need to be so dramatic? > - Be brief without being overly terse. When replying to a message, > include enough original material to be understood but no more. It > is extremely bad form to simply reply to a message by incnluding > all the previous message: edit out all the irrelevant material. > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855 I quoted exactly what I thought was appropriate. YOMV (Your Opinion May Vary). >> Both messages are out there, nothing I do can change that. You >> quoted Jergen's message which is not really any better than Hugh's. >> Why was that??? > > Because your reply to Juergen would have made little sense without it, > and I think that my reply to you would also have made little sense > without it. > > If you keep reposting stuff from people who are in many people's > killfiles, you'll end up those killfiles too. I would invite addition to some killfiles, but I don't seem to be able to control it much, so why should I worry about it? > It's a shame, because > you sometimes say interesting things. Your call. No, your killfile, YOUR call. Don't blame me for your actions. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-13 20:55 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? |
| Message-ID | <ocoojn$1e3o$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #56933 |
On 4/9/2017, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > Almost everybody who gets involved in ANS-Forth promotes themselves That ought to be "promotes himself".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 12:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <e6idnTZgTqHfUnrFnZ2dnUU7-VHNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56778 |
joel.rees@gmail.com wrote: > My impression is that Forth is not a language so much as a point of > view and a willingness to manage your own symbol tables, and, as you > can tell from the responses, it's a very individual point of > view. (Lisp has the same kinds of problems.) This is why it's hard > to get a truly standard Forth. You could say the same about LISP, that's true. But in both languages there is a common standard, and many versions, some standard- compliant, some not. Truly standard Forth's aren't unusual. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 20:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <GWSFA.395181$FF4.231104@fx27.am4> |
| In reply to | #56815 |
Andrew Haley wrote: > joel.rees@gmail.com wrote: > >> My impression is that Forth is not a language so much as a point of >> view and a willingness to manage your own symbol tables, and, as you >> can tell from the responses, it's a very individual point of >> view. (Lisp has the same kinds of problems.) This is why it's hard >> to get a truly standard Forth. > > You could say the same about LISP, that's true. But in both languages > there is a common standard, and many versions, some standard- > compliant, some not. Truly standard Forth's aren't unusual. > > Andrew. Thanks for posting your views. Would you happen to have a list of "Truly standard Forths", because I've checked out gForth, swift Forth, eforth, CameForth, 4e4th, Win32Forth and none of them are "Truly standard Forths". Some are mostly complaint, but none are 100%, which is how I under "Truly" to mean. Thanks again. Take care now, Darin Murphy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 14:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7f29fd7b-e950-4dda-9456-b951f7bc5c22@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56820 |
On Friday, April 7, 2017 at 3:48:40 PM UTC-5, Darin Murphy wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: > > > joel.rees@gmail.com wrote: > > > >> This is why it's hard > >> to get a truly standard Forth. Oh no, someone on clf has expressed a concern with standards! Is this concern real, or is it a delusion based on problems that the poster himself has defined into existence, with no assistance from ANS Forth? So far a good 90% of such problems are of the latter category... > > > > You could say the same about LISP, that's true. But in both languages > > there is a common standard, and many versions, some standard- > > compliant, some not. Truly standard Forth's aren't unusual. > > > > Andrew. > > Thanks for posting your views. Would you happen to have a list of "Truly > standard Forths", because I've checked out gForth, That's one. > swift Forth, That's another. > eforth, > CameForth, 4e4th, Of of these says it is, the others don't say - so probably aren't. > Win32Forth That's another. So at least 3/6 of these are standard Forths. > and none of them are "Truly standard > Forths". Some are mostly complaint, but none are 100%, which is how I > under "Truly" to mean. Thanks again. Yep, it's a delusion again. Probably something like "there are extra words!" Thanks for helpfully defining 'truly' as '100%'. Anyone confused about the one is certain to be enlightened by the other. > > Take care now, > > Darin Murphy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 21:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8c089adc-b6b3-44bb-ab5e-a5300c0ab9f4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56822 |
On Friday, April 7, 2017 at 2:03:18 PM UTC-7, Julian Fondren wrote: > On Friday, April 7, 2017 at 3:48:40 PM UTC-5, Darin Murphy wrote: > > Andrew Haley wrote: > > > > > joel.rees@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >> This is why it's hard > > >> to get a truly standard Forth. > > Oh no, someone on clf has expressed a concern with standards! > > Is this concern real, or is it a delusion based on problems that the poster > himself has defined into existence, with no assistance from ANS Forth? > > So far a good 90% of such problems are of the latter category... > > > > > > > You could say the same about LISP, that's true. But in both languages > > > there is a common standard, and many versions, some standard- > > > compliant, some not. Truly standard Forth's aren't unusual. > > > > > > Andrew. > > > > Thanks for posting your views. Would you happen to have a list of "Truly > > standard Forths", because I've checked out gForth, > > That's one. > > > swift Forth, > > That's another. > > > eforth, > > CameForth, 4e4th, > > Of of these says it is, the others don't say - so probably aren't. > > > Win32Forth > > That's another. So at least 3/6 of these are standard Forths. > > > and none of them are "Truly standard > > Forths". Some are mostly complaint, but none are 100%, which is how I > > under "Truly" to mean. Thanks again. > > Yep, it's a delusion again. Probably something like "there are extra words!" > > Thanks for helpfully defining 'truly' as '100%'. Anyone confused about > the one is certain to be enlightened by the other. In VFX, SwiftForth and Gforth FIND behaves differently, so any program that assumes one of these behaviors will not run on the other systems, despite the fact that all of them are ANS-Forth compliant. The problem is that ANS-Forth is ambiguous. If Darin wants compatibility between ANS-Forth systems, then he needs to start with the disambiguifiers: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- \ ****** \ ****** Our disambiguifiers --- these allow FIND to work consistently on all ANS-Forth systems. \ ****** \ The disambiguifiers should not work in interpretation mode. Because of this, I previously had them abort on STATE @ 0=. \ Anton Ertl complained that this prevents them from being used inside of [ ] which sometimes makes sense. \ So, now I just have them give a warning, rather than abort, although this isn't strictly ANS-Forth compliant. \ Some still abort though --- if they access the return-stack, they really can't be used in interpretive mode. : +loop state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: +LOOP ***" cr then postpone +loop ; immediate : ." state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: .quote ***" cr then postpone ." ; immediate : ; state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: ; ***" cr then postpone ; ; immediate : >r state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: >R ***" postpone >r ; immediate : abort" state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: ABORTquote ***" cr then postpone abort" ; immediate : begin state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: BEGIN ***" cr then postpone begin ; immediate : do state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: DO ***" postpone do ; immediate : does> state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: DOES> ***" cr then postpone does> ; immediate : else state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: ELSE ***" cr then postpone else ; immediate : exit state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: EXIT ***" postpone exit ; immediate : I state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: I ***" postpone I ; immediate : if state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: IF ***" cr then postpone if ; immediate : J state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: J ***" postpone J ; immediate : leave state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: LEAVE ***" postpone leave ; immediate : literal state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: LITERAL ***" cr then postpone literal ; immediate : loop state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: LOOP ***" postpone loop ; immediate : postpone state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: POSTPONE ***" cr then postpone postpone ; immediate : r> state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: R> ***" postpone r> ; immediate : r@ state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: R@ ***" postpone r@ ; immediate : recurse state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: RECURSE ***" cr then postpone recurse ; immediate : repeat state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: REPEAT ***" cr then postpone repeat ; immediate : s" state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: Squote ***" cr then postpone s" ; immediate : then state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: THEN ***" cr then postpone then ; immediate : unloop state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: UNLOOP ***" postpone unloop ; immediate : until state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: UNTIL ***" cr then postpone until ; immediate : while state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: WHILE ***" cr then postpone while ; immediate : [ state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: [ ***" postpone [ ; immediate : ['] state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: ['] ***" cr then postpone ['] ; immediate : [char] state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: [CHAR] ***" cr then postpone [char] ; immediate : 2>r state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: 2>R ***" postpone 2>r ; immediate : 2r> state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: 2R> ***" postpone 2r> ; immediate : 2r@ state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: 2R@ ***" postpone 2r@ ; immediate : ?do state @ 0= abort" *** no interpretation semantics for: ?DO ***" postpone ?do ; immediate : again state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: AGAIN ***" cr then postpone again ; immediate : c" state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: Cquote ***" cr then postpone c" ; immediate : case state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: CASE ***" cr then postpone case ; immediate : compile, state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: COMPILE, ***" cr then postpone compile, ; immediate : endcase state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: ENDCASE ***" cr then postpone endcase ; immediate : endof state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: ENDOF ***" cr then postpone endof ; immediate : of state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: OF ***" cr then postpone of ; immediate VFX? [if] : [compile] state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: [COMPILE] ***" cr then postpone [compile] ; immediate [then] : 2literal state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: 2LITERAL ***" cr then postpone 2literal ; immediate : abort" state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: ABORTquote ***" cr then postpone abort" ; immediate : fliteral state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: FLITERAL ***" cr then postpone fliteral ; immediate : (local) state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: (LOCAL) ***" cr then postpone (local) ; immediate : locals| state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: LOCALS| ***" cr then postpone locals| ; immediate : ;code state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: ;CODE ***" cr then postpone ;code ; immediate : ahead state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: AHEAD ***" cr then postpone ahead ; immediate : cs-pick state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: CS-PICK ***" cr then postpone cs-pick ; immediate : cs-roll state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: CS-ROLL ***" cr then postpone cs-roll ; immediate : sliteral state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no interpretation semantics for: SLITERAL ***" cr then postpone sliteral ; immediate \ All of the above words are provided for working around the bug in ANS-Forth in which they either \ lack an xt value (for example: ; in Gforth) or they have an xt value that aborts when executed (for example: IF in VFX). \ Note that S" and C" are both state-smart in VFX, but this is in violation to ANS-Forth that says they have no interpretation semantics. \ I don't allow them to work in interpretation mode --- this doesn't matter anyway, because I redefine them later in the novice-package. \ All of the above were listed in the ANS-Forth manual: "Interpretation semantics for this word are undefined." According to section 4.1.2 \ of the ANS-Forth document: "attempting to obtain the execution token, (e.g., with 6.1.0070 ', 6.1.1550 FIND, etc.) of a definition with \ undefined interpretation semantics [is an ambiguous condition]." \ SwiftForth doesn't have [COMPILE] but VFX does --- so [COMPILE] is only disambiguified for VFX. \ SwiftForth isn't fully ANS-Forth compliant because it doesn't have [COMPILE] --- other ANS-Forth systems presumably do have [COMPILE] though. \ Nobody really uses [COMPILE] so it is not important (I don't know why [COMPILE] is in ANS-Forth, as we have POSTPONE). VFX? [if] : to postpone to ; immediate [then] \ The ANS-Forth document (6.2.2295) states: "An ambiguous condition exists if either POSTPONE or [COMPILE] is applied to TO." \ Disambiguifying TO does work under VFX though, so it is provided above. It may work under other ANS-Forth compilers too, although it is not ANS-Forth compliant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 03:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <20170408032807.696509ac@_> |
| In reply to | #56846 |
On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 21:21:10 -0700 (PDT) hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > : +loop state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no > interpretation semantics for: +LOOP ***" cr then postpone > +loop ; immediate Couldn't you define a single Forth word for much of that middle portion instead of retyping or cut-n-pasting it over and over? Ditto for the abort" check and string emit. : +loop HUGH_CHECK if ." +LOOP ***" cr then postpone +loop ; immediate Obviously, you'd need a DUP on the STATE check for the IF that follows. > : >r state @ 0= abort" *** no > interpretation semantics for: >R ***" postpone > >r ; immediate Don't the redefined words using abort" need an IF after STATE @ 0= ? If not, why are you checking STATE at all? Doesn't that leave an extraneous value on the stack? Is it intended to be an error code? Why? ... I.e., the string emit tells you it failed the STATE check. > : abort" Shouldn't you check and redefine abort" first, prior to using it in >r ? Or, perhaps, last, after everything else is redefined? ... Either way, I'd suspect that redefining abort" part of the way through the list isn't correct. Rod Pemberton -- All it takes for humanity to conquer the world's toughest problems is to hope, to believe, to share, and to do, in cooperation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 02:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b4763d6f-d8e4-4036-a7d3-a12a238d8518@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56853 |
On Saturday, April 8, 2017 at 2:27:08 AM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote: > On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 21:21:10 -0700 (PDT) > hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > > : +loop state @ 0= if cr ." WARNING: *** no > > interpretation semantics for: +LOOP ***" cr then postpone > > +loop ; immediate > > Couldn't you define a single Forth word for much of that middle portion > instead of retyping or cut-n-pasting it over and over? Ditto for the > abort" check and string emit. Strictly speaking, if you want to be rude, then the answer is... yes of course. You could for example have : bad-word >IN @ >R : ... build string ... EVALUATE ; bad-word >R bad-word R> bad-word R@ ... : abort" .\" this one has \" in it so I will just special-case it" ; Or more code to avoid repeating BAD-WORD . And of course, if you can remember *why* anyone would avoid the use of EVALUATE, instead of just internalizing "people complain when I use this word. I must ensure nobody can ever find fault in me ever, so I shall avoid it", then you can see that EVALUATE is completely fine here. So why does Hugh write code like this? I can only assume that it is because Hugh is not a Forth advocate, but an advocate of post-Forth. He has left Forth behind. Meaning: he is moving in a direction. A direction his body must be facing. And probably his eyes are on the side of his body aligned with the forefront of movement in that direction. And if so, his eyes can see, on the horizon: that in order to reach post-Forth, many things will have to be deleted. So Hugh is perhaps already writing his 64-bit all-words-tickable code as if such features of Forth do not exist. > > : >r state @ 0= abort" *** no > > interpretation semantics for: >R ***" postpone > > >r ; immediate > > Don't the redefined words using abort" need an IF after STATE @ 0= ? ABORT" hi" is similar to IF ." hi" ABORT THEN > Shouldn't you check and redefine abort" first, prior to using it in >r ? The only point of this code is to make these words tickable. None of the words depend on any of the words being tickable so the order of definition doesn't matter.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 12:45 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <PcudnTW6I-UUi3XFnZ2dnUU7-f_NnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56820 |
On 4/7/17 10:48 AM, Darin Murpy wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: > >> joel.rees@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> My impression is that Forth is not a language so much as a point of >>> view and a willingness to manage your own symbol tables, and, as you >>> can tell from the responses, it's a very individual point of >>> view. (Lisp has the same kinds of problems.) This is why it's hard >>> to get a truly standard Forth. >> >> You could say the same about LISP, that's true. But in both languages >> there is a common standard, and many versions, some standard- >> compliant, some not. Truly standard Forth's aren't unusual. >> >> Andrew. > > Thanks for posting your views. Would you happen to have a list of "Truly > standard Forths", because I've checked out gForth, swift Forth, eforth, > CameForth, 4e4th, Win32Forth and none of them are "Truly standard > Forths". Some are mostly complaint, but none are 100%, which is how I > under "Truly" to mean. Thanks again. I'd be interested to know in what ways swiftForth is non-standard (bearing in mind that not all words in CORE-EXT and optional wordsets are required in order for a system to be Standard). I believe gForth and Win32Forth also strive to be standard. Thanks, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth D. Rather FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 00:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <S6WFA.264391$ft5.215483@fx16.am4> |
| In reply to | #56824 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > I'd be interested to know in what ways swiftForth is non-standard > (bearing in mind that not all words in CORE-EXT and optional wordsets > are required in order for a system to be Standard). I believe gForth and > Win32Forth also strive to be standard. > > Thanks, > Elizabeth > I'm sorry Mrs. Conklin/Rather, but how can Swiftforth, and Gforth be standard and yet not work with "Starting Forth" which is also supposed to be written in Standard Forth? This is rather confusing. If they are all "Truly" standard Forth, shouldn't they all be 100% compatible? If not than what does "Standard Forth" exactly mean? I am not trying to be sound rude or trolling, just confused about how something can be standard and pass all of the tests and yet not be compatible with a book that has been setting the standard for the last 36 years? Anyway it's cool, I'm not upset about it. Really I'm not. I just think that for people who are not professional programmers, who are interested in learning Forth for whatever reason, should have a book like "Starting Forth" and a verion of Forth that works completely with the book, so that they can at least follow the instructions without becoming frustrated with them. That's all. Anyway, thanks for taking the time to try and clarify somethings for me. Take care now, Darin Murphy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 14:38 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <ELydnZDnTc1krXXFnZ2dnUU7-TvNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56826 |
On 4/7/17 2:26 PM, Darin Murpy wrote: > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> >> I'd be interested to know in what ways swiftForth is non-standard >> (bearing in mind that not all words in CORE-EXT and optional wordsets >> are required in order for a system to be Standard). I believe gForth and >> Win32Forth also strive to be standard. >> >> Thanks, >> Elizabeth >> > > I'm sorry Mrs. Conklin/Rather, but how can Swiftforth, and Gforth be > standard and yet not work with "Starting Forth" which is also supposed > to be written in Standard Forth? This is rather confusing. If they are > all "Truly" standard Forth, shouldn't they all be 100% compatible? If > not than what does "Standard Forth" exactly mean? I am not trying to be > sound rude or trolling, just confused about how something can be > standard and pass all of the tests and yet not be compatible with a > book that has been setting the standard for the last 36 years? Anyway > it's cool, I'm not upset about it. Really I'm not. I just think that > for people who are not professional programmers, who are interested in > learning Forth for whatever reason, should have a book like "Starting > Forth" and a verion of Forth that works completely with the book, so > that they can at least follow the instructions without becoming > frustrated with them. That's all. Anyway, thanks for taking the time > to try and clarify somethings for me. Take care now, That's why I'm asking what things you find "non-Standard". Starting Forth was brought into closer conformance with ANS Forth than the original versions (1982 and 1986), but still differs from current Standards and contemporary practice in many ways. For example, it requires source code to be in blocks, which is has not been a requirement for many years; the Blocks wordset is optional. It also implies an indirect-threaded implementation, which is not required by any Standard since Forth82, and assumes things about the use of the Return Stack which are specifically warned against in ANS Forth and current standards. And I think people whose interest is only casual should be able to take advantage of modern computing environments. Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth D. Rather FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 01:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pVWFA.404445$8b6.154493@fx19.am4> |
| In reply to | #56828 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > That's why I'm asking what things you find "non-Standard". Starting > Forth was brought into closer conformance with ANS Forth than the > original versions (1982 and 1986), but still differs from current > Standards and contemporary practice in many ways. For example, it > requires source code to be in blocks, which is has not been a > requirement for many years; the Blocks wordset is optional. It also > implies an indirect-threaded implementation, which is not required by > any Standard since Forth82, and assumes things about the use of the > Return Stack which are specifically warned against in ANS Forth and > current standards. And I think people whose interest is only casual > should be able to take advantage of modern computing environments. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth > Oh so basically the new standard has changed enough that the standard that "Starting Forth" uses is no longer valid. Okay, that makes sense. Thank you, Mrs. Conklin/Rather for explaining it to me better. Now, I understand why there is a difference. I know about the Forth83 and even the 94 standard, but didn't know it's be updated again. I just checked and I see it's 2012 now? Okay, thank you for the update. LOL!!! Take care now, Darin Murphy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 16:17 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <qfednbPm6-LU1XXFnZ2dnUU7-QPNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56831 |
On 4/7/17 3:20 PM, Darin Murpy wrote: > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> That's why I'm asking what things you find "non-Standard". Starting >> Forth was brought into closer conformance with ANS Forth than the >> original versions (1982 and 1986), but still differs from current >> Standards and contemporary practice in many ways. For example, it >> requires source code to be in blocks, which is has not been a >> requirement for many years; the Blocks wordset is optional. It also >> implies an indirect-threaded implementation, which is not required by >> any Standard since Forth82, and assumes things about the use of the >> Return Stack which are specifically warned against in ANS Forth and >> current standards. And I think people whose interest is only casual >> should be able to take advantage of modern computing environments. >> >> Cheers, >> Elizabeth >> > > Oh so basically the new standard has changed enough that the standard > that "Starting Forth" uses is no longer valid. Okay, that makes sense. > Thank you, Mrs. Conklin/Rather for explaining it to me better. Now, I > understand why there is a difference. I know about the Forth83 and even > the 94 standard, but didn't know it's be updated again. I just checked > and I see it's 2012 now? Okay, thank you for the update. LOL!!! Take > care now, Forth2012 is not significantly different from Forth94 (ANS Forth), it's mostly added and clarified some things. In general, the international standards bodies recommend that standards be reviewed and updated every 5 years or so. I don't think any contemporary programming language has gone 35 years without significant change. Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth D. Rather FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 12:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ocaii9$mmk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56831 |
On 4/8/2017 02:20, Darin Murpy wrote: > Mrs. Conklin/Rather I'm curious. Why are you addressing Elizabeth this way? I know where the surnames come from, but her sig is Elizabeth Rather, and you give everyone else (Rick, Albert etc) the first name treatment. -- Alex
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 01:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <xJfGA.597374$0k4.181250@fx37.am4> |
| In reply to | #56861 |
Alex wrote: > On 4/8/2017 02:20, Darin Murpy wrote: >> Mrs. Conklin/Rather > > I'm curious. Why are you addressing Elizabeth this way? I know where the > surnames come from, but her sig is Elizabeth Rather, and you give > everyone else (Rick, Albert etc) the first name treatment. > I do it as a sign of respect/courtesy, due to her position in both the Professional sided of Forth and for being one of Forth's original developers. I do the same for Mr. Moore too, because he was the inventor of Forth. If those titles bother either of them, I'm sure they will/would let me know, and I would start calling them by their first name like I do everyone else. Take care now, Darin Murphy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 10:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1d320a99-b667-400c-8548-64e1b9f686f4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56883 |
On Saturday, April 8, 2017 at 6:01:19 PM UTC-7, Darin Murphy wrote: > Alex wrote: > > > On 4/8/2017 02:20, Darin Murpy wrote: > >> Mrs. Conklin/Rather > > > > I'm curious. Why are you addressing Elizabeth this way? I know where the > > surnames come from, but her sig is Elizabeth Rather, and you give > > everyone else (Rick, Albert etc) the first name treatment. > > > > I do it as a sign of respect/courtesy, due to her position in both the > Professional sided of Forth and for being one of Forth's original > developers. Who told you that Elizabeth Rather was one of Forth's original developers? This is what she says about herself: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Elizabeth Rather is the co-founder of FORTH, Inc. and is a leading expert in the Forth programming language. Elizabeth was a colleague of Chuck Moore when he worked at NRAO in the early 1970s. During his development of Forth, she became the second ever Forth programmer. Since then, she has become a leading expert in the language and one of its main proponents. Elizabeth was the chair of the ANSI Technical Committee that produced the ANSI Standard for Forth (1994). She is an author of several books on Forth and gave many training seminars on its usage. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Does this support your statement that she developed Forth? Does she seem to be rather dodgy in regard to claiming any actual accomplishments of her own? > I do the same for Mr. Moore too, because he was the inventor > of Forth. I agree on this. All of the ANS-Forth cult members refer to Charles Moore as "Chuck" as if they are best buddies. The truth is that Charles Moore walked out on ANS-Forth in 1989 and never looked back. In 1994 the ANS-Forth document was rubber-stamped by ANSI because it had Charles Moore's name listed as a supporter. In 1997 the first-ever ANS-Forth compiler was written (Forth Inc. hired Rick van Norman to write SwiftForth) and it was too bug-ridden to be usable until version-3 came out several years later. Charles Moore has no involvement in ANS-Forth, and there are multiple quotes from him indicating that he doesn't consider ANS-Forth to be Forth at all. So, calling him "Chuck" and pretending that he is a supporter is just salesmanship. I very much doubt that Charles Moore has ever heard of any of the Forth-200x committee members, or cares in the slightest about their silly committee and their claim that they lead the whole Forth community. The committee members were appointed by Elizabeth Rather, and Charles Moore hasn't had any contact with her since the 1980s --- she has made a career out of bragging about her association with him, but he has never bragged about his association with her --- she is just a parasite that won't go away. This reminds me of when I was working as a cab-driver and passengers would often try to impress me by pretending to be best buddies with some celebrity because they had met the celebrity once --- there was never any evidence that the celebrity knew who they were or cared --- this was always a red flag for me that the passenger was going to try to run without paying, because people like that are psychopaths (maybe not full-fledged psychopaths like Ted Bundy, but sociopaths who make a lame attempt at being charming before they run).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web