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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #55968 > unrolled thread

Make Forth Small Again!

Started byHelmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com>
First post2017-03-20 09:58 -0700
Last post2017-03-24 17:52 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 212 — 28 participants

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

Contents

  Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 09:58 -0700
    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-20 10:34 -0700
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 10:51 -0700
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-20 18:08 +0000
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! NN <november.nihal@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 12:19 -0700
          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 05:51 -0700
            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 15:04 +0100
              Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-21 11:22 -1000
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 14:47 -0700
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 01:34 +0100
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-25 17:27 +1100
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-25 00:06 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-25 01:02 -0700
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-25 01:05 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-27 12:11 +1000
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-27 15:53 +1000
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-26 22:12 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-29 10:30 +1000
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-25 09:34 +0000
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! mhx@iae.nl - 2017-03-25 03:46 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-27 10:56 +1000
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-28 10:07 +1000
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! mhx@iae.nl - 2017-03-27 16:46 -0700
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-27 18:51 -0700
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-27 17:21 -1000
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-28 10:57 -0700
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! minforth@arcor.de - 2017-03-28 01:16 -0700
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-28 03:36 -0500
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! minforth@arcor.de - 2017-03-28 01:54 -0700
                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-28 12:57 -1000
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-28 03:51 -0500
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-29 10:29 +1000
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-21 03:33 -0500
          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 05:17 -0700
            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-21 09:42 -0500
              Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 09:49 -0700
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-21 12:12 -0500
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 10:28 -0700
              Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-03-21 16:43 -0400
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-21 14:11 -1000
          Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-21 16:46 +0000
            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-21 12:32 -0500
              Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 10:57 -0700
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-21 14:10 -0500
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 12:50 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-21 15:29 -0500
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 14:01 -0700
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-22 03:23 -0500
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2017-04-07 09:26 +0200
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 10:10 -1000
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-03-21 16:42 -0400
              Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-22 13:10 +0000
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 06:38 -0700
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-22 15:24 +0000
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-22 08:52 -0500
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-25 13:55 +0000
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-25 17:41 -0500
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 07:43 -0700
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 08:06 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 10:01 -0700
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 10:19 -0700
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 10:59 -0700
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 18:31 +0000
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 13:55 -0700
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 05:50 -0700
                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-23 08:05 -0500
                                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-23 13:47 +0000
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 15:31 +0100
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-23 10:25 -0500
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-24 18:07 +0000
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-03 10:45 +0100
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-05-03 03:50 -0700
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-05-03 05:57 -0500
                                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-03 12:08 +0100
                                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-03 12:26 +0100
                                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-03 16:02 +0100
                                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-03 16:08 +0100
                                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-03 16:35 +0100
                                                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-03 18:28 +0100
                                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-04 10:14 +0100
                                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-05-04 12:44 +0200
                                                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-04 12:32 +0100
                                                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-05-04 06:49 -0500
                                                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! crc <charles.childers@gmail.com> - 2017-05-04 04:50 -0700
                                                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-04 13:14 +0100
                                                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-05 11:19 +0100
                                                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-05-05 04:16 -0700
                                                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-05 12:35 +0100
                                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-03 13:55 -0700
                                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-03 17:04 -0500
                                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-05-04 07:29 +0300
                                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-05-04 02:52 -0500
                                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-05-04 05:08 -0400
                                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-05-04 06:34 -0500
                                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-04 11:17 -0500
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2017-05-03 19:03 +0100
                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-24 18:12 +0000
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-25 13:49 +0000
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-03-23 00:58 -0400
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-03-23 00:57 -0400
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-22 20:55 -1000
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 18:05 -0700
            Re: Make Forth Small Again! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 15:57 -0400
              Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-25 10:29 +0000
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 04:00 -0700
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-03 08:01 -0400
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-05-04 16:06 +0000
            Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 14:02 -0700
              Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-03-23 00:57 -0400
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-22 20:59 -1000
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-23 12:14 +0000
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-03-23 14:45 +0100
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-23 12:24 -1000
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-28 10:55 +1000
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-27 17:24 -1000
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-29 10:49 +1000
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-28 15:05 -1000
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 19:06 -0700
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 06:43 +0300
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-30 10:37 +1000
                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-29 19:34 -1000
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2017-03-23 10:36 +0000
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-23 11:33 +0000
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-03-23 14:58 +0100
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-24 17:57 +0000
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-24 22:32 +0000
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 17:10 -0700
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-25 07:31 +0000
          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2017-04-07 08:50 +0200
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 17:57 -0400
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-03 10:09 +0100
          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-03 10:28 +0100
          Re: Make Forth Small Again! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-03 07:57 -0400
          Re: Make Forth Small Again! stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2017-05-03 13:07 +0000
            Re: Make Forth Small Again! john <anon@example.com> - 2017-05-03 16:03 +0100
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-20 14:08 -1000
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-20 17:51 -0700
    Re: Make Forth Small Again! minforth@arcor.de - 2017-03-20 13:12 -0700
    Re: Make Forth Small Again! bruehlconsult@gmail.com - 2017-03-20 17:22 -0700
    Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-20 19:12 -0700
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 02:30 -0700
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! minforth@arcor.de - 2017-03-21 02:47 -0700
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-21 05:56 -0500
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 16:07 -0400
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-03-21 14:28 -1000
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-28 11:30 +1000
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-03-21 16:42 -0400
    Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 22:56 -0700
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 04:04 -0700
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-03-23 00:57 -0400
    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 02:32 -0700
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-24 10:00 +0000
        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 06:46 -0700
          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-24 14:41 +0000
            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 15:32 -0700
              Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-25 23:10 +0000
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 17:29 -0700
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-25 18:08 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-26 08:30 +0100
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-26 08:50 +0100
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 15:14 -0700
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-27 08:32 +0100
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 13:21 -0700
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-27 15:31 +0100
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-27 09:04 -0700
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-03-27 11:52 -0500
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-27 18:41 +0100
                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-03-27 12:58 -0500
                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-27 12:07 -0700
                                Re: Make Forth Small Again! foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2017-03-27 13:06 -0700
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-28 11:30 -0700
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-28 20:06 +0100
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-03-29 14:54 +0200
                                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-30 19:13 -0700
                                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-27 21:18 +0100
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-28 10:54 -0700
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 21:53 +0300
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-27 22:29 +0100
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 14:07 -0700
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-30 16:03 -0700
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-31 09:28 +0100
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 03:36 -0700
                              Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-31 19:29 -0700
                                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 04:37 -0700
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-01 09:23 -0700
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 10:37 -0700
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-01 11:55 -0500
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 14:15 -0700
                                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2017-05-06 12:55 -0700
                                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-07 12:08 +0100
                                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 09:04 -0700
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 21:35 +0200
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-04-01 20:35 -0400
                                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 11:52 -0700
                                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 16:31 -0700
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 20:54 -0700
                                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 21:13 -0700
                                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 16:06 -0700
                          Re: Make Forth Small Again! Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-31 09:42 +0100
                            Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 03:52 -0700
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-30 20:26 -0700
                Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-27 04:55 -0500
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-27 08:49 -0700
                  Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 13:35 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-30 14:23 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 15:28 -0700
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-30 23:20 -0700
                      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 02:29 -0700
                        Re: Make Forth Small Again! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 03:20 -0700
                    Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-31 03:38 -0500
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-24 09:17 -0500
      Re: Make Forth Small Again! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-24 17:52 -0700

Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11  Next page →

#56162

From"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com>
Date2017-03-22 20:55 -1000
Message-ID<qp-dnW4XAbjH7E7FnZ2dnUU7-Q3NnZ2d@supernews.com>
In reply to#56158
On 3/22/17 6:57 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 07:43:26 -0700 (PDT)
> hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 6:13:59 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote:
>
>> When QUIT executes (typically when ABORT or ABORT" call it), QUIT
>> fails to restore the system to a known state. 1.) BASE still has the
>> value that it had prior to the abort. 2.) The search-order is the
>> same as it was prior to the abort. 3.) The current word-list is the
>> same as it was prior to the abort.
>
> ...
>
>> The intelligent design for a Forth system would be for QUIT to
>> restore global variables (such as BASE the search-order, etc.) that
>> describe the state of the Forth system.
>
> Since QUIT is usually the first word executed, why wouldn't QUIT do
> this already?

Because classically, QUIT is what is executed at the *end* of processing 
each line of user input. QUIT is just supposed to *stop* and await user 
input. It's not supposed to change *anything*. ABORT and ABORT" reset 
*some* user state (specifically, the return stack, so you're back to 
basic user input), but it would be appalling if QUIT changed things like 
BASE. Suppose, for example, you typed:

hex here FF dump
here 10 erase
...etc.

You would be very, very upset if that 10 weren't interpreted in HEX.

This is simply a failure to understand what these words are supposed to 
do. The user is supposed to be in control. If you set BASE, it will stay 
until you reset it. That's particularly valuable when you are debugging 
hardware, which can involve a lot of hex addresses and bit patterns.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
Elizabeth R. Conklin
FORTH, Inc.
6080 Center Drive, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA  90045
USA

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

#56210

Fromhughaguilar96@gmail.com
Date2017-03-23 18:05 -0700
Message-ID<dcfd0ac9-d466-473b-86a6-e49ffecf56a4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#56162
On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 11:55:28 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> On 3/22/17 6:57 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 07:43:26 -0700 (PDT)
> > hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 6:13:59 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote:
> >
> >> When QUIT executes (typically when ABORT or ABORT" call it), QUIT
> >> fails to restore the system to a known state. 1.) BASE still has the
> >> value that it had prior to the abort. 2.) The search-order is the
> >> same as it was prior to the abort. 3.) The current word-list is the
> >> same as it was prior to the abort.
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> The intelligent design for a Forth system would be for QUIT to
> >> restore global variables (such as BASE the search-order, etc.) that
> >> describe the state of the Forth system.
> >
> > Since QUIT is usually the first word executed, why wouldn't QUIT do
> > this already?
> 
> Because classically, QUIT is what is executed at the *end* of processing 
> each line of user input. QUIT is just supposed to *stop* and await user 
> input. It's not supposed to change *anything*. ABORT and ABORT" reset 
> *some* user state (specifically, the return stack, so you're back to 
> basic user input), but it would be appalling if QUIT changed things like 
> BASE. Suppose, for example, you typed:
> 
> hex here FF dump
> here 10 erase
> ...etc.
> 
> You would be very, very upset if that 10 weren't interpreted in HEX.
> 
> This is simply a failure to understand what these words are supposed to 
> do. The user is supposed to be in control. If you set BASE, it will stay 
> until you reset it. That's particularly valuable when you are debugging 
> hardware, which can involve a lot of hex addresses and bit patterns.
> 
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth

Well, then, it is ABORT and ABORT" that need to be restore the system to a known state. Also, be vectored so the user can "be in control" and allow his own global variables to get restored also.

The problem is that a compile can crash. For example in a file you might have:

2 base !  ok
11 10 + . 101  ok
typo! 
Err# -13 ERR: Undefined word.
 -> typo!
        ^

So the INCLUDE crashed because there was a typo in the file. The user is back in the REPL again, but he doesn't know that it crashed when BASE was changed and that BASE is still changed.

11 10 + . 101  ok
123 . 
Err# -13 ERR: Undefined word.
 -> 123 .
       ^

Oh no! Numbers don't work anymore! The result is even worse if the search-order was changed at the time that the INCLUDE aborted. In this case, it is possible that all words in the FORTH vocabulary will be out of the search-order and the system won't recognize any words at all. This is when the novice programmer assumes that the Forth system is fatally corrupted and he clicks the big red X at the upper-right. Then he reloads his Forth system and tries again --- or not --- he may just think that Forth sucks so bad it is not worth trying again.

Nobody is saying that global variables such as BASE etc. should get restored if there was no abort.

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

#56131

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-03-22 15:57 -0400
Message-ID<oaukqc$7pf$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#56019
On 3/21/2017 12:46 PM, Anton Ertl wrote:
> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>> Some people think that because a word is in CORE it has to be in the
>> set of words which is always loaded into the system, and it must be
>> present in the predefined dictionary when Forth starts.  But this is
>> not true: there is no reason why some words can't be loaded from
>> source as required.  It is true that the system won't be standard
>> until they are loaded, but this doesn't matter to anyone.
>
> It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane incantations
> to load the FP words before I can use them on some of the systems I
> test on.

What are the "arcane" incantations?  Do you put bones in a bag and wave 
them over your head?


>> Therefore,
>> people complaining that the CORE wordset is "too large for small
>> systems" are not making any sense.
>
> Does it matter?  Running standard programs is not very important for
> small systems, and the core/extension difference does not make a big
> difference for most useful programs (they don't limit themselves to
> core words), and for "programmer portability" core/extension does not
> make a difference (they don't limit themselves to core words), either.

I don't agree that being standard is not important for "small" systems. 
As Elizabeth pointed out, systems are standard as much for portability 
of programmers as they are for portability of programs or systems.  If 
you don't care about portability of programmers, then you are either in 
a one man shop or are a hobbyist, neither of which is synonymous as 
running "small" systems.

-- 

Rick C

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

#56270

Fromanton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Date2017-03-25 10:29 +0000
Message-ID<2017Mar25.112909@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
In reply to#56131
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>On 3/21/2017 12:46 PM, Anton Ertl wrote:
>> It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane incantations
>> to load the FP words before I can use them on some of the systems I
>> test on.
>
>What are the "arcane" incantations?

E.g.,

vfxlin "include /usr/local/VfxLinEval/Lib/x86/Ndp387.fth"

Of course, that incantation may fail on a different computer that has
the exact same version of vfxlin.

[Andrew Haley:]
>>> Therefore,
>>> people complaining that the CORE wordset is "too large for small
>>> systems" are not making any sense.
>>
>> Does it matter?  Running standard programs is not very important for
>> small systems, and the core/extension difference does not make a big
>> difference for most useful programs (they don't limit themselves to
>> core words), and for "programmer portability" core/extension does not
>> make a difference (they don't limit themselves to core words), either.
>
>I don't agree that being standard is not important for "small" systems. 
>As Elizabeth pointed out, systems are standard as much for portability 
>of programmers as they are for portability of programs or systems.

But whether HEX, 2OVER, or THROW is in the CORE wordset or elsewhere
does not matter for portability of programmers.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
   EuroForth 2016: http://www.euroforth.org/ef16/

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

#56272

FromJulian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com>
Date2017-03-25 04:00 -0700
Message-ID<8a08e914-d330-4540-a709-835f3a58d98a@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#56270
On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 5:39:25 AM UTC-5, Anton Ertl wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> >On 3/21/2017 12:46 PM, Anton Ertl wrote:
> >> It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane incantations
> >> to load the FP words before I can use them on some of the systems I
> >> test on.
> >
> >What are the "arcane" incantations?
> 
> E.g.,
> 
> vfxlin "include /usr/local/VfxLinEval/Lib/x86/Ndp387.fth"

The eval version has SAVE , so (extra output snipped):

$ vfxlin include %lib%/x86/Ndp387.fth save vfx bye
$ ./vfx 1e fdup fnegate f/ f. bye
-1.

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

#58579

Fromrickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Date2017-05-03 08:01 -0400
Message-ID<oecgkt$tub$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#56270
On 3/25/2017 6:29 AM, Anton Ertl wrote:
> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> On 3/21/2017 12:46 PM, Anton Ertl wrote:
>>> It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane incantations
>>> to load the FP words before I can use them on some of the systems I
>>> test on.
>>
>> What are the "arcane" incantations?
>
> E.g.,
>
> vfxlin "include /usr/local/VfxLinEval/Lib/x86/Ndp387.fth"
>
> Of course, that incantation may fail on a different computer that has
> the exact same version of vfxlin.
>
> [Andrew Haley:]
>>>> Therefore,
>>>> people complaining that the CORE wordset is "too large for small
>>>> systems" are not making any sense.
>>>
>>> Does it matter?  Running standard programs is not very important for
>>> small systems, and the core/extension difference does not make a big
>>> difference for most useful programs (they don't limit themselves to
>>> core words), and for "programmer portability" core/extension does not
>>> make a difference (they don't limit themselves to core words), either.
>>
>> I don't agree that being standard is not important for "small" systems.
>> As Elizabeth pointed out, systems are standard as much for portability
>> of programmers as they are for portability of programs or systems.
>
> But whether HEX, 2OVER, or THROW is in the CORE wordset or elsewhere
> does not matter for portability of programmers.

So if these words are included but don't function the same won't impede 
the use of that Forth by a programmer accustomed to a standard Forth?

-- 

Rick C

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

#58670

Fromanton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Date2017-05-04 16:06 +0000
Message-ID<2017May4.180623@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
In reply to#58579
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>On 3/25/2017 6:29 AM, Anton Ertl wrote:
>> But whether HEX, 2OVER, or THROW is in the CORE wordset or elsewhere
>> does not matter for portability of programmers.
>
>So if these words are included but don't function the same won't impede 
>the use of that Forth by a programmer accustomed to a standard Forth?

Sure they would.  So?  Either the system implementor is interested in
being close to standard Forth, then they won't do that, or he isn't,
then the wordset does not matter.  E.g., OR is in CORE, and Chuck
Moore implemented an OR that does not function the same as a standard
OR.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
   EuroForth 2017: http://www.euroforth.org/ef17/

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

#56140

Fromhughaguilar96@gmail.com
Date2017-03-22 14:02 -0700
Message-ID<a2784d4a-fc07-4d39-a500-0db234d49f5a@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#56019
On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 10:17:36 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote:
> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
> >Some people think that because a word is in CORE it has to be in the
> >set of words which is always loaded into the system, and it must be
> >present in the predefined dictionary when Forth starts.  But this is
> >not true: there is no reason why some words can't be loaded from
> >source as required.  It is true that the system won't be standard
> >until they are loaded, but this doesn't matter to anyone.
> 
> It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane incantations
> to load the FP words before I can use them on some of the systems I
> test on.

This is a chronic annoyance --- both SwiftForth and VFX fail to load the floating-point package automatically --- in both cases the user has to manually load the FP, which requires reading the manual because this is done in a system-specific manner.

More than a few people have downloaded my novice-package and done an INCLUDE NOVICE.4TH and had the compile fail because the floating-point extensions weren't loaded --- in every case, they assumed that there was something wrong with the novice-package --- they either sent me an email telling me that the novice-package doesn't even compile, or they just deleted the novice-package on the assumption that it was non-standard code and/or was untested code.

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

#56159

FromRod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem>
Date2017-03-23 00:57 -0400
Message-ID<20170323005755.712ecd78@_>
In reply to#56140
On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 10:17:36 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote:
> > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:  
> > >Some people think that because a word is in CORE it has to be in
> > >the set of words which is always loaded into the system, and it
> > >must be present in the predefined dictionary when Forth starts.
> > >But this is not true: there is no reason why some words can't be
> > >loaded from source as required.  It is true that the system won't
> > >be standard until they are loaded, but this doesn't matter to
> > >anyone.  
> > 
> > It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane
> > incantations to load the FP words before I can use them on some of
> > the systems I test on.  
> 
> This is a chronic annoyance --- both SwiftForth and VFX fail to load
> the floating-point package automatically --- 

I'm aghast!  Why is there no check for that?  It's clearly the
problem of the system implementer since it couldn't possibly be the
domain of the user coder ...


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]

#56163

From"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com>
Date2017-03-22 20:59 -1000
Message-ID<qp-dnWkXAbio707FnZ2dnUU7-Q1QAAAA@supernews.com>
In reply to#56159
On 3/22/17 6:57 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
> hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 10:17:36 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote:
>>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>>>> Some people think that because a word is in CORE it has to be in
>>>> the set of words which is always loaded into the system, and it
>>>> must be present in the predefined dictionary when Forth starts.
>>>> But this is not true: there is no reason why some words can't be
>>>> loaded from source as required.  It is true that the system won't
>>>> be standard until they are loaded, but this doesn't matter to
>>>> anyone.
>>>
>>> It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane
>>> incantations to load the FP words before I can use them on some of
>>> the systems I test on.
>>
>> This is a chronic annoyance --- both SwiftForth and VFX fail to load
>> the floating-point package automatically ---
>
> I'm aghast!  Why is there no check for that?  It's clearly the
> problem of the system implementer since it couldn't possibly be the
> domain of the user coder ...

You can configure SwiftForth to load FP automatically, that's just not 
the default. You'd be amazed how much stuff SwiftForth customers do 
without FP.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
Elizabeth R. Conklin
FORTH, Inc.
6080 Center Drive, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA  90045
USA

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

#56171

Fromanton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Date2017-03-23 12:14 +0000
Message-ID<2017Mar23.131433@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
In reply to#56163
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>You can configure SwiftForth to load FP automatically, that's just not 
>the default. You'd be amazed how much stuff SwiftForth customers do 
>without FP.

Why should I be amazed?  Looking at my Forth programs, they all do
without more than half of the words the standard provides, and if I
take the intersection of the words these programs use, it's probably
just a dozen words or so.  That's no reason to let the user of a
desktop Forth system load all the other words manually in some
non-standardized way, or ask the user to configure his Forth system
manually (through some non-standardized mechanism) to load these
words.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
   EuroForth 2016: http://www.euroforth.org/ef16/

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

#56175

Fromalbert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst)
Date2017-03-23 14:45 +0100
Message-ID<ob0jgs$s2r$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl>
In reply to#56171
In article <2017Mar23.131433@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>,
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>>You can configure SwiftForth to load FP automatically, that's just not
>>the default. You'd be amazed how much stuff SwiftForth customers do
>>without FP.
>
>Why should I be amazed?  Looking at my Forth programs, they all do
>without more than half of the words the standard provides, and if I
>take the intersection of the words these programs use, it's probably
>just a dozen words or so.  That's no reason to let the user of a
>desktop Forth system load all the other words manually in some
>non-standardized way, or ask the user to configure his Forth system
>manually (through some non-standardized mechanism) to load these
>words.

I look at it this way. If I debug I load everything, SEE LOCATE
AUTOLOAD REGRESS H. TRAPS (^C) and the kitchen sink.
The resulting application program however must
- load only the necessary words
- certainly not have floating point if not needed
- case sensitive (to prevent as many mistakes as possible)
( be documented, have documented fail conditions etc. I leave that)

But *I* want my Forth to make applications that I can ship by e-mail
and that mere mortals can use without installing a Forth which
would involve more effort than loading floating point onto
Swiftforth.

>
>- anton

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]

#56205

From"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com>
Date2017-03-23 12:24 -1000
Message-ID<KZKdnXtTGpyb1knFnZ2dnUU7-SnNnZ2d@supernews.com>
In reply to#56171
On 3/23/17 2:14 AM, Anton Ertl wrote:
> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>> You can configure SwiftForth to load FP automatically, that's just not
>> the default. You'd be amazed how much stuff SwiftForth customers do
>> without FP.
>
> Why should I be amazed?  Looking at my Forth programs, they all do
> without more than half of the words the standard provides, and if I
> take the intersection of the words these programs use, it's probably
> just a dozen words or so.  That's no reason to let the user of a
> desktop Forth system load all the other words manually in some
> non-standardized way, or ask the user to configure his Forth system
> manually (through some non-standardized mechanism) to load these
> words.

SwiftForth is configured the way we and most of the customers we're in 
touch with use it, and we try to make it easy to add features you need 
and discard the ones you don't.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
Elizabeth R. Conklin
FORTH, Inc.
6080 Center Drive, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA  90045
USA

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

#56409

From"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com>
Date2017-03-28 10:55 +1000
Message-ID<obc8u4$13sn$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#56163
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> On 3/22/17 6:57 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
> > hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 10:17:36 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote:
> >>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
> >>>> Some people think that because a word is in CORE it has to be in
> >>>> the set of words which is always loaded into the system, and it
> >>>> must be present in the predefined dictionary when Forth starts.
> >>>> But this is not true: there is no reason why some words can't be
> >>>> loaded from source as required.  It is true that the system won't
> >>>> be standard until they are loaded, but this doesn't matter to
> >>>> anyone.
> >>>
> >>> It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane
> >>> incantations to load the FP words before I can use them on some of
> >>> the systems I test on.
> >>
> >> This is a chronic annoyance --- both SwiftForth and VFX fail to load
> >> the floating-point package automatically ---
> >
> > I'm aghast!  Why is there no check for that?  It's clearly the
> > problem of the system implementer since it couldn't possibly be the
> > domain of the user coder ...
>
> You can configure SwiftForth to load FP automatically, that's just not
> the default. You'd be amazed how much stuff SwiftForth customers do
> without FP.
>
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth

That explains why blatant bugs in SwiftForth f/p have gone uncorrected
for many years e.g.

3.141592e pad 5 represent pad 5 dump
  480129 33 31 34 31 35                                  31415            ok

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

#56414

From"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com>
Date2017-03-27 17:24 -1000
Message-ID<qe6dnTb_M-jISkTFnZ2dnUU7-dGdnZ2d@supernews.com>
In reply to#56409
On 3/27/17 2:55 PM, HAA wrote:
> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>> On 3/22/17 6:57 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
>>> On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 10:17:36 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote:
>>>>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>>>>>> Some people think that because a word is in CORE it has to be in
>>>>>> the set of words which is always loaded into the system, and it
>>>>>> must be present in the predefined dictionary when Forth starts.
>>>>>> But this is not true: there is no reason why some words can't be
>>>>>> loaded from source as required.  It is true that the system won't
>>>>>> be standard until they are loaded, but this doesn't matter to
>>>>>> anyone.
>>>>>
>>>>> It certainly matters to me that I have to do some arcane
>>>>> incantations to load the FP words before I can use them on some of
>>>>> the systems I test on.
>>>>
>>>> This is a chronic annoyance --- both SwiftForth and VFX fail to load
>>>> the floating-point package automatically ---
>>>
>>> I'm aghast!  Why is there no check for that?  It's clearly the
>>> problem of the system implementer since it couldn't possibly be the
>>> domain of the user coder ...
>>
>> You can configure SwiftForth to load FP automatically, that's just not
>> the default. You'd be amazed how much stuff SwiftForth customers do
>> without FP.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Elizabeth
>
> That explains why blatant bugs in SwiftForth f/p have gone uncorrected
> for many years e.g.
>
> 3.141592e pad 5 represent pad 5 dump
>   480129 33 31 34 31 35                                  31415            ok

By all means report any you know about to support@forth.com! We (and 
many of our customers) are primarily using SwiftForth to host SwiftX 
supporting embedded projects.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
Elizabeth R. Conklin
FORTH, Inc.
6080 Center Drive, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA  90045
USA

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

#56434

From"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com>
Date2017-03-29 10:49 +1000
Message-ID<obesst$1g1h$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#56414
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> On 3/27/17 2:55 PM, HAA wrote:
> > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> >> ...
> >> You can configure SwiftForth to load FP automatically, that's just not
> >> the default. You'd be amazed how much stuff SwiftForth customers do
> >> without FP.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Elizabeth
> >
> > That explains why blatant bugs in SwiftForth f/p have gone uncorrected
> > for many years e.g.
> >
> > 3.141592e pad 5 represent pad 5 dump
> >   480129 33 31 34 31 35                                  31415            ok
>
> By all means report any you know about to support@forth.com! We (and
> many of our customers) are primarily using SwiftForth to host SwiftX
> supporting embedded projects.
>
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth

I'll let you do that.  Reported it twice IIRC on different occasions.  Also saw
the problem mentioned by a user on the old forum.

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

#56435

From"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com>
Date2017-03-28 15:05 -1000
Message-ID<QZudnRd6waL7lUbFnZ2dnUU7-RHNnZ2d@supernews.com>
In reply to#56434
On 3/28/17 2:49 PM, HAA wrote:
> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>> On 3/27/17 2:55 PM, HAA wrote:
>>> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> You can configure SwiftForth to load FP automatically, that's just not
>>>> the default. You'd be amazed how much stuff SwiftForth customers do
>>>> without FP.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Elizabeth
>>>
>>> That explains why blatant bugs in SwiftForth f/p have gone uncorrected
>>> for many years e.g.
>>>
>>> 3.141592e pad 5 represent pad 5 dump
>>>   480129 33 31 34 31 35                                  31415            ok
>>
>> By all means report any you know about to support@forth.com! We (and
>> many of our customers) are primarily using SwiftForth to host SwiftX
>> supporting embedded projects.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Elizabeth
>
> I'll let you do that.  Reported it twice IIRC on different occasions.  Also saw
> the problem mentioned by a user on the old forum.

Sorry, it's not at all clear to me what the problem is.


-- 
Elizabeth R. Conklin
FORTH, Inc.
6080 Center Drive, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA  90045
USA

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

#56438

FromJulian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com>
Date2017-03-28 19:06 -0700
Message-ID<3d204af3-4389-4c64-8aae-4c7064d16156@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#56435
On Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 8:05:49 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> 
> Sorry, it's not at all clear to me what the problem is.
> 

The problem is that 3.14159e is truncated when Forth-94 says it
should round to nearest, which would result in "31416"

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

#56440

FromRon Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com>
Date2017-03-29 06:43 +0300
Message-ID<obfaat$6u0$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#56438

On 29/03/2017 5:06, Julian Fondren wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 8:05:49 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, it's not at all clear to me what the problem is.
>>
> 
> The problem is that 3.14159e is truncated when Forth-94 says it
> should round to nearest, which would result in "31416"

8th isn't Forth-94 compliant, but rounding just makes sense:

8th -e '3.14159 4 ## . cr bye'
3.1416

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

#56469

From"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com>
Date2017-03-30 10:37 +1000
Message-ID<obhgji$1lj$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#56438
Julian Fondren wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 8:05:49 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, it's not at all clear to me what the problem is.
> >
>
> The problem is that 3.14159e is truncated when Forth-94 says it
> should round to nearest, which would result in "31416"

Correct.  Some background.  As originally coded by Forth Inc REPRESENT
*did* in fact round.  But it relied on F>D rounding, which was non-compliant.
When Forth Inc subsequently corrected F>D, they didn't update REPRESENT.
All explained in my bug report some years ago.

The quick fix is to change the line:

    #EXP DUP >R - 1- >10** DROP  F>D <# #S #>

to:

    #EXP DUP >R - 1- >10** DROP  FROUND F>D <# #S #>

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

Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11  Next page →

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

csiph-web