Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #20052 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-02-26 17:03 -0500 |
| Last post | 2013-02-27 13:10 -1000 |
| Articles | 15 on this page of 115 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-02-26 17:03 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2013-02-27 04:06 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Richard Owlett <rowlett@pcnetinc.com> - 2013-02-27 05:30 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-27 06:34 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-02-27 14:42 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-27 11:54 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-02-27 15:27 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2013-02-27 21:58 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-27 16:33 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-02 17:23 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-02 15:12 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-03 14:30 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-03 14:49 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-07 16:58 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-07 16:35 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-08 17:29 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-08 12:17 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-28 00:17 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-28 01:04 -0800
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-28 17:10 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-28 11:20 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-02 16:54 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-02 15:38 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-03 14:43 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-03 15:05 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-03-03 23:14 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-04 03:41 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2013-03-04 11:00 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-04 12:47 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2013-03-04 16:27 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-04 19:27 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2013-03-04 20:46 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-03-05 00:19 -0800
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-05 12:17 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2013-03-05 17:22 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-05 17:52 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2013-03-05 17:03 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-03-05 12:38 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-05 17:57 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-03-05 13:29 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andy Valencia <user@vsta.org> - 2013-03-05 22:19 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-05 17:58 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2013-03-05 19:26 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-03-05 11:19 -0800
Forth convergence with rest of world Andy Valencia <user@vsta.org> - 2013-03-05 22:17 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-03-05 15:15 -0800
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-03-06 17:35 +0100
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-06 16:44 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-06 17:39 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-05 18:16 -0600
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-03-06 13:49 -0500
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-06 19:11 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-03-06 14:24 -0500
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-06 19:40 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-03-06 09:26 -1000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-03-06 09:26 -1000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-06 15:34 -0600
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Andy Valencia <user@vsta.org> - 2013-03-06 22:04 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-03-06 12:09 -1000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-07 04:24 -0600
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-03-07 04:15 -0800
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-07 08:42 -0600
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-03-07 13:50 -0800
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-03-07 12:12 -0500
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-07 18:36 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-03-07 14:07 -0500
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-07 19:43 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-08 17:27 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-03-07 08:47 -1000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world awegel@arcor.de (Alex Wegel) - 2013-03-07 21:42 +0100
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-03-07 14:43 -0800
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-03-07 13:53 -1000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2013-03-07 12:38 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-07 08:43 -0600
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Syd Rumpo <usenet@nononono.co.uk> - 2013-03-08 18:04 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-08 12:18 -0600
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Syd Rumpo <usenet@nononono.co.uk> - 2013-03-08 18:36 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-03-08 14:30 -1000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Syd Rumpo <usenet@nononono.co.uk> - 2013-03-09 01:27 +0000
Re: Forth convergence with rest of world Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-09 02:43 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-05 01:19 -0800
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-05 12:01 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-08 17:02 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-04 12:45 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-04 11:58 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-04 19:34 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-04 15:15 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2013-03-04 23:31 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2013-03-05 17:07 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-03-05 12:11 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-03-05 00:32 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-07 17:00 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-07 16:52 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-08 17:32 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-08 12:25 -0600
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2013-03-11 09:57 -0700
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-11 12:05 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-11 17:20 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-03-11 14:05 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-03-11 14:35 -0700
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-03-12 00:21 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2013-03-12 12:13 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-03-11 19:16 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-11 19:29 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-03-11 21:36 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-11 20:52 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-03-11 14:39 -0700
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-11 21:52 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2013-03-12 01:11 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-03-12 00:41 +0000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2013-03-12 17:33 +0100
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-02-27 11:51 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-27 09:25 -1000
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2013-02-27 17:23 -0500
Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-27 13:10 -1000
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-12 00:21 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <khlou2$fkf$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #20563 |
Alex McDonald wrote: > The XCHAR wordset. It could have done with a literal for xchars; not > supporting it for codepoints is a shortcoming that was discussed at > the time. For example, the number U+3B5 or \u3B5 for "ε", which would > (for UTF-8 SET-ENCODING) create the correctly composed UTF-8 literal > of $CE35. Not sure what you want, or what you want that for. This is how it is supposed to work: 'ε' hex. $3B5 ok So you get the code point just like with 'a'. The encoded version should not live on the stack, but it's easy to create that in memory (whith xc!+). Well, if you want to have it in memory right away, s" ε" will do fine. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-12 12:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <513f165e.1323262@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #20551 |
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:20:47 GMT, anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote: >1) If S" is to be avoided, programmers have to know about the >alternative. So it does concern the programmers of that system as >well as the implementors. We have no standard way to specify a word's interpretation and compilation actions separately. This needs to be fixed. Then the STATE-smart stuff can all disappear. However, a measure of common practice needs to emerge and so far there is very little. >2) If there is a good way to clean up the mess of ad-hoc recognizers >that lives in a full-featured standard system, that's probably of >interest to implementors of other systems, too. > >3) Sometimes programmers want to add a way to write a new kind of >literals (whatever their application needs) in their program. >Currently they tend to write STATE-smart parsing words for that. With >programmer-definable recognizers, they could avoid that. > >4) If programmer-definable recognizers are a useful feature, it would >be good if we established common practice; and for that it's necessary >for implementors and programmers to know about this idea. The extensible interpret/compile loop is an idea that is revisited every decade or so. However, until Forth20xx sorts out the compilation terminology, people cannot understand each other. It makes my brain hurt to be forced to distinguish between STATE-smart state-smart and then to be told how good recognizers recognisers are and to have to read http://amforth.sourceforge.net/pr/Recognizer-en.pdf http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth/ef12/papers/paysan-recognizers.pdf before we even know how to deal with compilation properly. This discussion could really do with a good presentation of terms as some of the discussion does not match Matthias Trute's paper. From a quick look, the term also goes back to 2005 for Forth. Stephen -- Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time 133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691 web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-11 19:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <513e2d8f$0$26897$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #20550 |
In article <aIudncQby9Jxk6PMnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@supernews.com>, Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote: >Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thursday, March 7, 2013 3:52:24 PM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> >>>> No, that is your straw man. I had not even thought about that. The >>>> main reasons for recognizers are to avoid S" and to clean up the mess >>>> of ad-hoc recognizers that lives in a full-featured standard system. >>> >>> But there is not a mess of ad-hoc recognizers. There's two kinds of >>> number and that's it: the rest can be done in the usual way with >>> immediate words, modulo the usual argument about state-smart S" . >>> >> No mess in the standard. Some mess in a standard system. The vendor >> decides which recognizers to apply and what syntax each uses. The >> ad-hoc mess is a specification problem, probably best addressed by >> the 200x TC, such as it is. > >Such as we are, yes. :-) > >I'm not sure that this conversation makes any sense, really. If the >main reasons for recognizers are to avoid S" and to clean up the mess >of ad-hoc recognizers that lives in a full-featured standard system, >then it's of no concern to anyone except the implementor of that >system. As I was one of the first to come up with a systematic way to define new recognizer (using a PREFIX mechanism) maybe I must clear this up. It is almost impossible to run e.g. a program of Marcel Hendrix if your Forth doesn't understand $ prefixes. Now there is no way I would tolerate that these (at the time nonstandard) numbers find a place in my ciforth kernel. Solution: a loadable extension `` WANT $-PREFIX '' So my idea is to move the matter to applications. If you write a webserver you rather want to understand $HOME as a string that points to a home directory, rather than a hex number. And maybe you wouldn't want to be bothered with words that could be mistaken for complex floating point numbers. If Forth is extending the language to make a application language, than number denotation's need to be in the realm of application too. > >Andrew. 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]
| From | Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-11 19:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkjsfam.5ho.zbigniew2011REMOVE@Tichy.myhome.org> |
| In reply to | #20553 |
In comp.lang.forth, Albert van der Horst wrote: > If you write a webserver you rather want to understand $HOME > as a string that points to a home directory, rather than a > hex number. Not really. The above is valid only for the languages, that do "substitution" of variables with their values (TCL, bash...) - and Forth _isn't_ one of these. -- The consensus was, as usual in this community, that there is no consensus. (RA)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-11 21:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <khlf8j$92f$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #20554 |
Zbiggy wrote: > In comp.lang.forth, Albert van der Horst wrote: > >> If you write a webserver you rather want to understand $HOME >> as a string that points to a home directory, rather than a >> hex number. > > Not really. > > The above is valid only for the languages, that do "substitution" of > variables with their values (TCL, bash...) - and Forth _isn't_ one of > these. Well, we have values and locals, and they do substitute their values... One of the primary philosophies of Forth is "don't bury your tools". Recognizers for literals (single, double integers, floats) are part of the Forth compiler, so that is a tool. In current Forth's, it is burried, you can't easily access it. I think Andrew agreed that allowing people to shoot into their foot with powerful tools is ok in Forth. This is not nanny's diddley-doo, this is Forth. The current state of art with recognizers is to make experiments, and interchange ideas. Maybe a common approach will emerge, or we will have the xkcd situation, that we have 30 ways of adding a recognizer to a system instead of just 20. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-11 20:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkjsk6q.bae.zbigniew2011REMOVE@Tichy.myhome.org> |
| In reply to | #20559 |
In comp.lang.forth, Bernd Paysan wrote: > The current state of art with recognizers is to make experiments, and > interchange ideas. Maybe a common approach will emerge, or we will have the > xkcd situation, that we have 30 ways of adding a recognizer to a system > instead of just 20. Anyway: a variable in Forth doesn't need to be renamed from HOME to $HOME to get its value - therefore Albert's rationale is invalid. $ as a prefix for hex numbers is known - if I'm correct - at least since late 70-ties, even longer than with "h" as a suffix. It is very convenient to mark the radix with such prefixes. It's used since so many years - why the need to change that? It became boring? -- The consensus was, as usual in this community, that there is no consensus. (RA)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-11 14:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <954b385d-11bf-4157-ab75-e7653cdaf2a1@r9g2000vbh.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #20560 |
On Mar 11, 8:52 pm, Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REM...@gmail.REMOVE.com> wrote: > In comp.lang.forth, Bernd Paysan wrote: > > > The current state of art with recognizers is to make experiments, and > > interchange ideas. Maybe a common approach will emerge, or we will have the > > xkcd situation, that we have 30 ways of adding a recognizer to a system > > instead of just 20. > > Anyway: a variable in Forth doesn't need to be renamed from HOME to $HOME to > get its value - therefore Albert's rationale is invalid. > > $ as a prefix for hex numbers is known - if I'm correct - at least since > late 70-ties, even longer than with "h" as a suffix. It is very convenient > to mark the radix with such prefixes. It's used since so many years - why > the need to change that? It became boring? No I don't think so. I've noticed that Albert prefers to indicate strings with $. > -- > The consensus was, as usual in this community, that there is no consensus. (RA)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-11 21:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkjsno9.fn4.zbigniew2011REMOVE@Tichy.myhome.org> |
| In reply to | #20564 |
In comp.lang.forth, Alex McDonald wrote: > No I don't think so. I've noticed that Albert prefers to indicate > strings with $. "Perl-way"? Well, it's not possible to please everybody, you know. Anyway: instead of $HOME for web-server something like serverHome can be used - and it's even more verbose and clear. -- The consensus was, as usual in this community, that there is no consensus. (RA)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-12 01:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4j0g7vw40tut.1ri7jpqbenbvr$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #20560 |
Op Mon, 11 Mar 2013 20:52:25 +0000 (UTC) schreef Zbiggy: > In comp.lang.forth, Bernd Paysan wrote: > >> The current state of art with recognizers is to make experiments, and >> interchange ideas. Maybe a common approach will emerge, or we will have the >> xkcd situation, that we have 30 ways of adding a recognizer to a system >> instead of just 20. > > Anyway: a variable in Forth doesn't need to be renamed from HOME to $HOME to > get its value - therefore Albert's rationale is invalid. > > $ as a prefix for hex numbers is known - if I'm correct - at least since > late 70-ties, even longer than with "h" as a suffix. It is very convenient > to mark the radix with such prefixes. It's used since so many years - why > the need to change that? It became boring? Normally, the interpreter in Forth tries to find the word that matches the input or else tries to convert it to a number. My Forth knows it is a string if it is enclosed in quotes. A few years ago I extended this, when a word is prefixed with a $-sign, it looks into the (DOS)environment and returns the string. Like this $COMSPEC type C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\COMMAND.COM ok $OS type Windows_NT ok What's wrong with that? I admit, I have not used this for long. -- Coos CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-12 00:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkjt1jq.ojj.zbigniew2011REMOVE@Tichy.myhome.org> |
| In reply to | #20570 |
In comp.lang.forth, Coos Haak wrote: > A few years ago I extended this, when a word is prefixed with a $-sign, it > looks into the (DOS)environment and returns the string. Like this > $COMSPEC type C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\COMMAND.COM ok > $OS type Windows_NT ok > > What's wrong with that? I admit, I have not used this for long. Actually, nothing's that wrong - it's the convention, you took in your implementation. Well, personally I prefer $ as hex-number prefix. It's particularly useful, if you want to use assembler. The DOS environment related things can be examined using a designated word, let's call it dosEnv ( addr1 c1 -- addr2 c2 f ). You surely know, hot such word is supposed to work? -- The consensus was, as usual in this community, that there is no consensus. (RA)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-12 17:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <10t54r0wqcety$.1epv8tjudf1jr$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #20573 |
Op Tue, 12 Mar 2013 00:41:12 +0000 (UTC) schreef Zbiggy: > In comp.lang.forth, Coos Haak wrote: > >> A few years ago I extended this, when a word is prefixed with a $-sign, it >> looks into the (DOS)environment and returns the string. Like this >> $COMSPEC type C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\COMMAND.COM ok >> $OS type Windows_NT ok >> >> What's wrong with that? I admit, I have not used this for long. > > Actually, nothing's that wrong - it's the convention, you took in your > implementation. Well, personally I prefer $ as hex-number prefix. It's > particularly useful, if you want to use assembler. > > The DOS environment related things can be examined using a designated word, > let's call it dosEnv ( addr1 c1 -- addr2 c2 f ). > > You surely know, hot such word is supposed to work? Of course, GETENV is at the kernel of this procedure. The difference is that it does not return a flag, just ( c-addr1 u1 -- c-addr2 u2 ). When the input string can't be found in the environment or the environment string is empty, it just returns u2 as zero. A flag is redundant. The string with $ prepended isn't necessary, just a test that it worked. I did the same with strings in percent-quotes like %PATH% to look more like MS-DOS and that worked too. -- Coos CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-27 11:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1302271132010.7508@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #20054 |
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Rod Pemberton wrote: > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 04:06:00 -0500 > From: Rod Pemberton <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> > Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth > Subject: Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... > > "Rob Sciuk" <rob@controlq.com> wrote in message > news:alpine.BSF.2.00.1302261641340.449@yoko.controlq.com... >> >> Owing to a long ago promised user request, I have made " and ." >> both immediate and state smart, so that the " and ." will work >> as expected either interactively or in a colon word as follows: >> > > I'm waiting on Ms. Rather to reply that you shouldn't do that, > i.e., state smart words. She's been telling me that for the past > three years now. Are you paying attention? > > > RP Heh heh ... my strings are null terminated as well ;-). As I claim no standard, and offer no warranty, the state-smart nature of MiniForth only seemed appropriate, though the number of state-smart words is limited. IIRC, the list of state smart words are limited to does> : ; [ ] and the two quote words which I just added. Removing state from MiniForth would not be difficult, but as of now, like much of MiniForth, it is left as exersize for the interested student. Ms. Rather has expressed opinions in the past about the calamity of rolling one's own forth instead of using a commercial "kitchen sink" version -- and instead learning the zen of Forth-Fu! Don't get me wrong, I have nothing but the deepest respect for Elizabeth, her opinions, and her nth dregree black belt skills. I just have a different opinion, on this matter. Also, I do not believe that MiniForth will have any negative impact upon the revenues of either MPE or Forth Inc, other than to increase awareness of the Forth language amoung the unconverted ... and therefore perhaps to increase the market for commercial tools ... Many have opined about the wrong-headedness of using C instead of assembler as the base language. As you can see, I remain a contrarian, and feel that there *IS* a place in the hierarchy for a simple, portable, embeddable C based Forth which people can use -- or not, as they wish. My next project, however will be to write a cross assembler based upon MiniForth, and a target system for various embedded systems. By no way will this impact the commercial Forths, but it will give me some small satisfaction to have created a ground up tool which *I* find useful.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-27 09:25 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <MpWdncNcRu8qwLPMnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #20066 |
On 2/27/13 6:51 AM, Rob Sciuk wrote: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Rod Pemberton wrote: > >> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 04:06:00 -0500 >> From: Rod Pemberton <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> >> Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth >> Subject: Re: MiniForth 0.1.18 has just been released ... >> >> "Rob Sciuk" <rob@controlq.com> wrote in message >> news:alpine.BSF.2.00.1302261641340.449@yoko.controlq.com... >>> >>> Owing to a long ago promised user request, I have made " and ." >>> both immediate and state smart, so that the " and ." will work >>> as expected either interactively or in a colon word as follows: >>> >> >> I'm waiting on Ms. Rather to reply that you shouldn't do that, >> i.e., state smart words. She's been telling me that for the past >> three years now. Are you paying attention? Andrew and Anton are handling this issue just fine. :-) >> RP > > Heh heh ... my strings are null terminated as well ;-). > > As I claim no standard, and offer no warranty, the state-smart nature of > MiniForth only seemed appropriate, though the number of state-smart > words is limited. IIRC, the list of state smart words are limited to > does> : ; [ ] and the two quote words which I just added. Removing > state from MiniForth would not be difficult, but as of now, like much of > MiniForth, it is left as exersize for the interested student. > > Ms. Rather has expressed opinions in the past about the calamity of > rolling one's own forth instead of using a commercial "kitchen sink" > version -- and instead learning the zen of Forth-Fu! Don't get me > wrong, I have nothing but the deepest respect for Elizabeth, her > opinions, and her nth dregree black belt skills. I just have a > different opinion, on this matter. Also, I do not believe that > MiniForth will have any negative impact upon the revenues of either MPE > or Forth Inc, other than to increase awareness of the Forth language > amoung the unconverted ... and therefore perhaps to increase the market > for commercial tools ... Folks are welcome to roll their own system as an academic exercise, and many do. I do urge people who are coming to Forth as newbies to start by learning on an existing, standard Forth. If you know how to use standard Forth and then want to experiment in new directions, at least you're doing so from a base of experience. And I am not at all trying to "protect" the commercial Forths. My recommendation to newbies to start on a standard Forth certainly would embrace any of the fine non-commercial systems such as Gforth and Win32Forth. But people get into all kinds of trouble coping with the peculiarities of eclectic variants like Jonesforth. If one is going to base a serious project on Forth, there are important reasons to use a standard system, whether free or commercial, including the potential to find programmers, start with a fully tested and well-documented code base, get support, have more facility to port to other platforms, etc. > Many have opined about the wrong-headedness of using C instead of > assembler as the base language. As you can see, I remain a contrarian, > and feel that there *IS* a place in the hierarchy for a simple, > portable, embeddable C based Forth which people can use -- or not, as > they wish. My next project, however will be to write a cross assembler > based upon MiniForth, and a target system for various embedded systems. > By no way will this impact the commercial Forths, but it will give me > some small satisfaction to have created a ground up tool which *I* find > useful. Enjoy! Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-27 17:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1302271628080.54509@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #20070 |
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > Folks are welcome to roll their own system as an academic exercise, and many > do. I do urge people who are coming to Forth as newbies to start by learning > on an existing, standard Forth. If you know how to use standard Forth and > then want to experiment in new directions, at least you're doing so from a > base of experience. Nolo contendere. I learned Forth at university using a Fig implementation on an Ohio Scientific (6502 based) micro, graduated to a commercial Forth on a CBM C-64 (??), ran L&P and F-83 on DOS, and only some time later wrote my first portable interpreter under HP-UX on a Unix workstation, and backported it to PC's via the WatCom C compiler. This in the days before Gforth. As a programming professional, I will admit that my C-Fu has been stronger than my Forth-Fu, but that was not by choice, merely the requirements of the market and the various job(s). > > And I am not at all trying to "protect" the commercial Forths. My > recommendation to newbies to start on a standard Forth certainly would > embrace any of the fine non-commercial systems such as Gforth and Win32Forth. > But people get into all kinds of trouble coping with the peculiarities of > eclectic variants like Jonesforth. Jonesforth is a strange beast, but it hasn't hurt Forth in any real way, and has served only to whet the appetites of those who stumbled upon it. I expect MiniForth has similar pecadillos, but is not inherently bad. I also contend that while commercial Forth's tend to support "standard" implementations, to know Forth well, one must understand the difference between dialects. Indeed, in the transition between F83-> 89-> 94-> ANS, forth "shims" supported the transition from one standard to the next, and were used to evaluate standards proposals. Of course, this might be more of an historical perspective, since I have a bit of history behind me, so to speak. > If one is going to base a serious project on Forth, there are important > reasons to use a standard system, whether free or commercial, including the > potential to find programmers, start with a fully tested and well-documented > code base, get support, have more facility to port to other platforms, etc. The installed base of forth programmers are probably in attendance in comp.lang.forth, less a handful of serious engineers, who use commercial Forth(s) quietly, lest they lose their (time to) market advantage to the competition. Still, I cannot argue that Forth standards are generally good, and with some notable exceptions, have improved the evolution of the language. Having written at least 3 interpreters, I found myself faithfully following a standard only once. Since then, I've justified being unconstrained by standards, but generally I'm aware of them, and consider them a guideline. As legend has it, Mr. Moore uses a forth which suits his needs, and while not to compare myself with Chuck, MiniForth does a good job of scratching my itch, as it were. > Enjoy! > > Cheers, > Elizabeth Thanks for your words!! Cheers, Rob.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-27 13:10 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <T7ydnQEfRc_WD7PMnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #20083 |
On 2/27/13 12:23 PM, Rob Sciuk wrote: ... > The installed base of forth programmers are probably in attendance in > comp.lang.forth, less a handful of serious engineers, who use commercial > Forth(s) quietly, lest they lose their (time to) market advantage to the > competition. The installed base of Forth programmers is hardly represented here at all, and it's far more than a handful. We have a pretty large base of customer companies, most of which have multiple active Forth programmers, and I assume the same is true of MPE. And who knows how many active users of the free systems there are? The thing is, they are busy working on their projects and primarily concerned with their companies' application domain (power systems, antenna controls, whatever) or their personal projects rather than language debates. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web