Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #56541 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-01 12:10 -0400 |
| Last post | 2017-04-08 01:37 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 202 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 12:10 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-01 17:06 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 16:37 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 19:21 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 17:16 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:26 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:51 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 18:50 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 19:18 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:29 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 22:01 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-02 21:46 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:54 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-02 22:26 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 08:34 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-01 18:47 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:28 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 04:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-02 15:44 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:56 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:16 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:38 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 16:42 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-08 12:41 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 17:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 22:03 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-01 22:56 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:32 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:45 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:03 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:31 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:35 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:37 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 19:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:58 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:06 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-03 10:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 01:21 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2017-04-02 13:58 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 11:16 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 19:38 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:10 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-02 22:02 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-02 15:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 23:48 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 23:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 10:23 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-03 15:56 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-03 20:57 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-03 08:08 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-02 19:22 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 22:46 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 20:38 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 07:07 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 00:17 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 07:41 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 20:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 00:15 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-04 02:08 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 03:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-04 06:25 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 20:19 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 17:33 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-08 18:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 19:03 +0000
Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 08:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? joel.rees@gmail.com - 2017-04-06 03:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 15:46 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-07 18:59 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:57 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:37 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:31 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:45 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-07 20:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:31 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 06:18 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? mhx@iae.nl - 2017-04-08 03:01 -0700
Starting Forth (was: Is there a free version ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 12:34 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 15:53 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 09:36 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-07 20:30 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 17:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 01:22 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 23:01 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-08 23:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 17:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 18:18 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 23:05 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 03:11 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-09 12:24 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 14:16 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 13:50 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-10 06:19 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-10 11:20 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 18:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 19:42 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-11 15:26 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 10:24 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:42 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 11:28 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 07:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 14:30 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 16:53 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 14:44 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-09 08:19 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 00:26 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 21:39 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 07:47 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 21:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:18 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-10 11:41 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-10 07:57 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 12:27 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 15:57 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2017-04-11 13:24 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-12 01:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 23:37 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 16:59 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 17:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:32 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 12:09 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 12:18 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 15:54 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 01:47 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 02:33 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? mhx@iae.nl - 2017-04-11 04:12 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:14 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:02 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:24 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:09 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 21:37 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 15:59 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? john <anon@example.com> - 2017-04-12 17:12 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:19 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:54 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 21:12 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:19 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 00:27 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:32 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:49 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 21:37 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:53 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:25 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:27 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:52 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:53 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 03:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 00:22 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-04-13 15:59 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:07 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:58 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 02:54 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 18:29 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 07:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 08:04 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 23:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:00 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-10 09:21 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:49 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-10 10:26 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 03:10 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:55 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-07 12:41 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:48 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 14:03 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 21:21 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-04-08 03:28 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 02:39 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 12:45 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 00:26 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 14:38 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:20 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 16:17 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-04-08 12:49 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 01:01 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 10:06 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-09 19:37 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 16:09 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 17:26 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? minforth@arcor.de - 2017-04-09 22:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 22:44 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 18:47 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 12:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-10 10:18 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 16:14 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 18:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-11 03:21 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-12 04:42 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 13:51 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 14:04 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-08 09:10 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-08 12:50 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:31 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2017-04-07 20:50 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 22:04 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2017-04-07 21:22 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:37 -0400
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 10:24 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <07Kdnf9iQ4cOaHrFnZ2dnUU7-dfNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56813 |
On 4/7/17 5:46 AM, Darin Murphy wrote: >> Which means that not having a Forth that is completely compatible with the Starting Forth book may be an advantage. It gets you used to having to glue things together yourself. > I really don't buy that. I believe the reason Starting Forth doesn't > match up in many ways any modern Forth has more to do with a larger > problem I've observed in Software in general that is either free or > outside the main stream. That is lack of desire to do the boring work. > It's fun to build and tinker with your creations, but it's sooo boring > to document and update your documents about said software, so they > don't. Once I get enough experience programming in Forth and revisit > Assembly, I'll write a forth that fits the "Starting Forth" book letter > by letter just so that new comings can have their own text for Forth and > the heck with the other Forths out there since they cannot given > maintain their compatability with a book they endorse on their Forth > webpages. The important reason for not using Starting Forth as an introduction to Forth is that it portrays a very primitive system that will be unattractive to programmers interested in serious programming, an impression that is enhanced by its cute cartoons. For example, using blocks for source and data was an attractive option when many Forths ran standalone without a host OS, for example, but is a turnoff to programmers who prefer their own programming editors. And ITC is simple to implement, but slower than the optimizing Forths that can be found in increasing numbers (particularly when the ITC Forth is implemented in C), thus leading to the impression that Forth is too slow for professional work. Forth was designed for serious application programming, and has been used successfully that way right along. It should not be presented as a toy. Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth R. Conklin FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 20:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <TQSFA.280003$o87.46889@fx21.am4> |
| In reply to | #56818 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > The important reason for not using Starting Forth as an introduction to > Forth is that it portrays a very primitive system that will be > unattractive to programmers interested in serious programming, an > impression that is enhanced by its cute cartoons. For example, using > blocks for source and data was an attractive option when many Forths ran > standalone without a host OS, for example, but is a turnoff to > programmers who prefer their own programming editors. And ITC is simple > to implement, but slower than the optimizing Forths that can be found in > increasing numbers (particularly when the ITC Forth is implemented in > C), thus leading to the impression that Forth is too slow for > professional work. Forth was designed for serious application > programming, and has been used successfully that way right along. It > should not be presented as a toy. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth > Thank you Mrs. Conklin/Rather posting your opinion. I just did a google search, looking for reviews of "Starting Forth" and there are a lot of them and most of them are 4 to 5 out of 5. From reading them, many read "Starting Forth" in college for a class and they found it both entertaining and informative. Most of the reviews I've read from GoodReads, Amazon, Barns & Nobels, were in 2000+, which isn't bad for a book that was written in the 80s. Many reviewers mentioned that this was there introduction to stack based languages and many said "Starting Forth" was the standard, which means that to most of the world this book reflects Forth. As such I think that either this book should be updated to reflect the more modern Forth or a more Forth should be built to reflect "Starting Forth"'s interpretation for Educational purposes. Then perhaps this would help increase potential programmers moving on to more complex and modern forths afterwards, which would be good for all Forthers. Just a thought. Take care now, Darin Murphy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 11:28 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <pcmdnRCfge8KmXXFnZ2dnUU7-a_NnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56819 |
On 4/7/17 10:42 AM, Darin Murpy wrote: > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> The important reason for not using Starting Forth as an introduction to >> Forth is that it portrays a very primitive system that will be >> unattractive to programmers interested in serious programming, an >> impression that is enhanced by its cute cartoons. For example, using >> blocks for source and data was an attractive option when many Forths ran >> standalone without a host OS, for example, but is a turnoff to >> programmers who prefer their own programming editors. And ITC is simple >> to implement, but slower than the optimizing Forths that can be found in >> increasing numbers (particularly when the ITC Forth is implemented in >> C), thus leading to the impression that Forth is too slow for >> professional work. Forth was designed for serious application >> programming, and has been used successfully that way right along. It >> should not be presented as a toy. >> >> Cheers, >> Elizabeth >> > > Thank you Mrs. Conklin/Rather posting your opinion. I just did a google > search, looking for reviews of "Starting Forth" and there are a lot of > them and most of them are 4 to 5 out of 5. From reading them, many read > "Starting Forth" in college for a class and they found it both > entertaining and informative. Most of the reviews I've read from > GoodReads, Amazon, Barns & Nobels, were in 2000+, which isn't bad for a > book that was written in the 80s. Many reviewers mentioned that this > was there introduction to stack based languages and many said "Starting > Forth" was the standard, which means that to most of the world this book > reflects Forth. As such I think that either this book should be updated > to reflect the more modern Forth or a more Forth should be built to > reflect "Starting Forth"'s interpretation for Educational purposes. Then > perhaps this would help increase potential programmers moving on to more > complex and modern forths afterwards, which would be good for all > Forthers. Just a thought. We did look seriously into a truly updated Starting Forth several years ago, but the effort would have been considerable, and we still felt that the approach, while friendly and entertaining to young people and hobbyists would still be off-putting to serious programmers, too many of whom see Forth as a toy as it is. I strongly recommend that you review some of the more recent Forth books available from various sources. Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth D. Rather FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 07:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <adefdd24-d777-45f5-a412-deedb48c9237@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56819 |
On Friday, April 7, 2017 at 9:42:29 PM UTC+1, Darin Murphy wrote: > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > > The important reason for not using Starting Forth as an introduction to > > Forth is that it portrays a very primitive system that will be > > unattractive to programmers interested in serious programming, an > > impression that is enhanced by its cute cartoons. For example, using > > blocks for source and data was an attractive option when many Forths ran > > standalone without a host OS, for example, but is a turnoff to > > programmers who prefer their own programming editors. And ITC is simple > > to implement, but slower than the optimizing Forths that can be found in > > increasing numbers (particularly when the ITC Forth is implemented in > > C), thus leading to the impression that Forth is too slow for > > professional work. Forth was designed for serious application > > programming, and has been used successfully that way right along. It > > should not be presented as a toy. > > > > Cheers, > > Elizabeth > > > > Thank you Mrs. Conklin/Rather posting your opinion. I just did a google > search, looking for reviews of "Starting Forth" and there are a lot of > them and most of them are 4 to 5 out of 5. From reading them, many read > "Starting Forth" in college for a class and they found it both > entertaining and informative. Most of the reviews I've read from > GoodReads, Amazon, Barns & Nobels, were in 2000+, which isn't bad for a > book that was written in the 80s. Many reviewers mentioned that this > was there introduction to stack based languages and many said "Starting > Forth" was the standard, which means that to most of the world this book > reflects Forth. As such I think that either this book should be updated > to reflect the more modern Forth or a more Forth should be built to > reflect "Starting Forth"'s interpretation for Educational purposes. Then > perhaps this would help increase potential programmers moving on to more > complex and modern forths afterwards, which would be good for all > Forthers. Just a thought. > > Take care now, > > Darin Murphy Darin, Starting Forth is the Standard people know about worldwide. If good or not good does not really matter - nor if they like it or not. And with the eBook as part of the Forth Bookshelf it can be read and accessed worldwide. See https://www.amazon.co.uk/Starting-Forth-Leo-Brodie-ebook/dp/B01MS7YDKD/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8 And as Forth INC hosts it on their website, they identify themselves with it. Unfortunately many people here have forgotten that for each of them there was a time when their knowledge of Forth was ZERO - and this is where they started. And there are many ways to get into Forth - mine might be wrong for many - but it worked and like Forth again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 14:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2017Apr8.163050@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #56818 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>The important reason for not using Starting Forth as an introduction to
>Forth is that it portrays a very primitive system that will be
>unattractive to programmers interested in serious programming, an
>impression that is enhanced by its cute cartoons.
And yet Starting Forth has attracted many programmers to Forth over
the years. Maybe they were not interested in (what you consider)
serious programming from the start, but interests change. My guess is
that those people interested in (what you consider) serious
programming will look at the TIOBE index and pick the language at the
top spot (Java at the moment) or the one with the biggest increase
since last year (Go at the moment).
> For example, using
>blocks for source and data was an attractive option when many Forths ran
>standalone without a host OS, for example, but is a turnoff to
>programmers who prefer their own programming editors.
Updating it to show the use of files is possible, but unfortunately
suffers from the problem of being very setup-specific.
>And ITC is simple
>to implement, but slower than the optimizing Forths that can be found in
>increasing numbers (particularly when the ITC Forth is implemented in
>C)
Given that the 2003 edition was written to work with iForth and
SwiftForth, I am sure that all references to ITC are gone.
- 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]
| From | Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 16:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <eA8GA.807216$F83.660649@fx38.am4> |
| In reply to | #56865 |
Anton Ertl wrote: > And yet Starting Forth has attracted many programmers to Forth over > the years. Maybe they were not interested in (what you consider) > serious programming from the start, but interests change. My guess is > that those people interested in (what you consider) serious > programming will look at the TIOBE index and pick the language at the > top spot (Java at the moment) or the one with the biggest increase > since last year (Go at the moment). I agree with Anton, while I was in the IT Industry (20+ years), I delt with a lot of programmers (mainframe thru webdeveloping) and most of the were looking for the money languages (C++, Visual Basic, Fox, Java, Javascript, Perl, etc.,). Forth is not a money language currently, and last time I checked as of March 2017 Forth is below the 50 mark, so most young would be programmers will never see it. >> For example, using >>blocks for source and data was an attractive option when many Forths ran >>standalone without a host OS, for example, but is a turnoff to >>programmers who prefer their own programming editors. > > Updating it to show the use of files is possible, but unfortunately > suffers from the problem of being very setup-specific. > Actually for my own purposes eventually, I will prefer a stand alone ForthOS because I'm going to moving away from mainstream OSs, save for Raspien which I can run emulators on for games. I might go back to the original Starting Forth that ran Fig if I can find one that will run in dosbox, that way I can avoid errors and look at Forth when it was still a self supporting language and didn't have all those complexities that make the mess we have today in our software industry. LOL!!! >>And ITC is simple >>to implement, but slower than the optimizing Forths that can be found in >>increasing numbers (particularly when the ITC Forth is implemented in >>C) > > Given that the 2003 edition was written to work with iForth and > SwiftForth, I am sure that all references to ITC are gone. > > - anton Thanks Anton for your opinion, suggestions and ideas. Take care now, Darin Murphy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 14:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2017Apr9.164416@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #56871 |
Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> writes:
> I might go back to the
>original Starting Forth that ran Fig
I have my doubts that the 1981 edition of Starting Forth is more
compatible with fig-Forth than the 2003 edition is with Gforth. The
1981 edition was written for the 1981 Forth systems by Forth, Inc. (I
guess microForth).
- 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]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 08:19 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <tYmdnaU9Wcu85nfFnZ2dnUU7-RPNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56932 |
On 4/9/17 4:44 AM, Anton Ertl wrote: > Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> writes: >> I might go back to the >> original Starting Forth that ran Fig > > I have my doubts that the 1981 edition of Starting Forth is more > compatible with fig-Forth than the 2003 edition is with Gforth. The > 1981 edition was written for the 1981 Forth systems by Forth, Inc. (I > guess microForth). That is correct. At the time, FORTH, Inc. had two systems, microFORTH for microprocessors (8080, 6800, etc., which were pretty new at the time) and miniFORTH for minicomputers (PDP-11, Nova, etc.) which included database and graphics libraries, and Starting Forth would have worked fine with either. It was very definitely incompatible with figForth. The 1986 revision included changes that brought it closer to Forth82 (which wasn't figForth, either, which enraged a lot of FIG supporters). Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth D. Rather FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 00:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ocf1ci$qjd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56871 |
On 4/8/2017 12:53 PM, Darin Murpy wrote: > > Actually for my own purposes eventually, I will prefer a stand alone > ForthOS because I'm going to moving away from mainstream OSs, save for > Raspien which I can run emulators on for games. There is some irony in the fact that of the systems that host a real OS, the RaspberryPi is the only one I am aware of that offers a usable bare iron Forth and I'm not sure the the Forth OS on the rPi is actually very complete. I think these days you have a choice of running under an OS or working with a very limited system. > I might go back to the > original Starting Forth that ran Fig if I can find one that will run in > dosbox, Huh? I don't think I've heard of a Fig Forth that runs under any OS. I suppose you could grab one of the many Fig Forths written to run on a small CPU and run it on an emulator under DOS or Windows. I believe someone has done that for the PDP-11 Fig Forth. I helped him copy some PDFs into text files. I can't recall his name, but I can dig it up if you are interested. > that way I can avoid errors and look at Forth when it was still > a self supporting language and didn't have all those complexities that > make the mess we have today in our software industry. LOL!!! I have no idea what "mess" you are talking about. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt with wanting to learn Forth. I find it interesting when people come here looking to learn about Forth and quickly start explaining how the Forth they find isn't the Forth they are looking for and so they start criticizing it. I think I may have gone through that phase myself at one point. The beauty of Forth is if you don't like what you find, you are always free to create your own. Let us know when you have done that. I'd be interested in what you end up with and just how useful it is to someone wanting to learn how to use a modern Forth. Have you considered that maybe the Forths are fine and it is the Starting Forth book that needs to be updated? :) -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 21:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <877f2s98qo.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #56968 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: > There is some irony in the fact that of the systems that host a real > OS, the RaspberryPi is the only one I am aware of that offers a usable > bare iron Forth and I'm not sure the the Forth OS on the rPi is > actually very complete. I don't even understand why someone would want a bare iron Forth on hardware as complicated as an rpi. But, I think there's a bare iron Scheme (same issues) so maybe some parts of it could be repurposed for Forth. On a Pi, I'd just run a user mode Forth. Bare iron Forth is of more interest on the many little ARM and comparable boards out there, that can run various RTOS's but that we usually don't think of as interactive OS platforms. Maybe that's starting to change, with efforts like MicroPython, NodeMCU, and so on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 07:47 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <ocf2j9$1o0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56969 |
On 10/04/2017 7:39, Paul Rubin wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >> There is some irony in the fact that of the systems that host a real >> OS, the RaspberryPi is the only one I am aware of that offers a usable >> bare iron Forth and I'm not sure the the Forth OS on the rPi is >> actually very complete. > > I don't even understand why someone would want a bare iron Forth on > hardware as complicated as an rpi. But, I think there's a bare iron > Scheme (same issues) so maybe some parts of it could be repurposed for > Forth. On a Pi, I'd just run a user mode Forth. Agreed. I'm always happy to see my test-suite running just as nicely on an RPI as it does on a Mac or Windows machine... > Bare iron Forth is of more interest on the many little ARM and > comparable boards out there, that can run various RTOS's but that we > usually don't think of as interactive OS platforms. Maybe that's > starting to change, with efforts like MicroPython, NodeMCU, and so on. Yep. I've tried to get some interest from moneyed-parties in getting 8th ported to bare-iron systems. But realistically, it was never designed for systems that small, and so far very few have shown any interest (beyond the talking stage, that is).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 21:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8737dg986j.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #56970 |
Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> writes: > Yep. I've tried to get some interest from moneyed-parties in getting > 8th ported to bare-iron systems. But realistically, it was never > designed for systems that small, and so far very few have shown any > interest (beyond the talking stage, that is). I half-remember you were making an embedded board for 8th? I haven't kept track but I'd expect the runtime requirements to be similar to Micropython and similar systems. https://www.grisp.org/ might be of interest -- ARM boards made specifically for embedded Erlang. They're expensive compared to hobby stuff, but are serious hardware suitable for industrial purposes, with long term component sourcing etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 09:18 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <ocf7tq$tg3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56971 |
On 10/04/2017 7:51, Paul Rubin wrote: > I half-remember you were making an embedded board for 8th? I haven't > kept track but I'd expect the runtime requirements to be similar to > Micropython and similar systems. I was, and am; but it's the very lowest of priorities since it has no funding. I do have the components, but ... it'll take a lot more time. > > https://www.grisp.org/ might be of interest -- ARM boards made > specifically for embedded Erlang. They're expensive compared to hobby > stuff, but are serious hardware suitable for industrial purposes, with > long term component sourcing etc. Could be, I'll have to take a look.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 11:41 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words |
| Message-ID | <ocfjvi$jqp$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #56968 |
In article <ocf1ci$qjd$1@dont-email.me>, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >On 4/8/2017 12:53 PM, Darin Murpy wrote: <SNIP> >> I might go back to the >> original Starting Forth that ran Fig if I can find one that will run in >> dosbox, > >Huh? I don't think I've heard of a Fig Forth that runs under any OS. I >suppose you could grab one of the many Fig Forths written to run on a >small CPU and run it on an emulator under DOS or Windows. I believe >someone has done that for the PDP-11 Fig Forth. I helped him copy some >PDFs into text files. I can't recall his name, but I can dig it up if >you are interested. There are quite a few fig-Forth's and many run under an OS. E.g. one of my first projects on the Osborne CP/M computer was to change the figForth to use blocks in files, instead on a bare floppy. An MS-DOS figforth is available on my site below as fig86.zip via figforth.html. The first version of ciforth was a 386 fig-forth (inasfar as such can exist), and you can find it there too. As Elizabeth Rather has pointed out, this won't help you with Starting Forth. > > >> that way I can avoid errors and look at Forth when it was still >> a self supporting language and didn't have all those complexities that >> make the mess we have today in our software industry. LOL!!! > >I have no idea what "mess" you are talking about. > >I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt with wanting to learn >Forth. I find it interesting when people come here looking to learn >about Forth and quickly start explaining how the Forth they find isn't >the Forth they are looking for and so they start criticizing it. I >think I may have gone through that phase myself at one point. > >The beauty of Forth is if you don't like what you find, you are always >free to create your own. Let us know when you have done that. I'd be >interested in what you end up with and just how useful it is to someone >wanting to learn how to use a modern Forth. Have you considered that >maybe the Forths are fine and it is the Starting Forth book that needs >to be updated? :) It is somewhat unpleasant to talk about a mess, but of you want to understand the internals of a Forth, a fig source may be better than e.g. Gforth's source. yourforth, jonesforth and ciforth may be as good as figForth in this respect. Groetjes Albert >Rick C -- 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 | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 07:57 -1000 |
| Subject | Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words |
| Message-ID | <UbCdnW8oLesPWnbFnZ2dnUU7-YHNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56987 |
On 4/9/17 11:41 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > It is somewhat unpleasant to talk about a mess, but of you want to > understand the internals of a Forth, a fig source may be better than > e.g. Gforth's source. > yourforth, jonesforth and ciforth may be as good as figForth in this > respect. That kind of study will show you the internals of *some* Forths, but they vary significantly from each other as well as from Fig and current standards. Each Forth implementation has its own objective (conceptual simplicity, performance, features, etc.). IMO understanding Forth implementation strategies is a diversion from the objective of learning how to use it in *applications*, which is its purpose. If your personal objective is to understand the internals, that will be best served by acquiring skills in using Forth for applications first, and then you will be able to judge how a particular implementation strategy serves its objectives. Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth D. Rather FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 12:27 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words |
| Message-ID | <87pogk6p2b.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #57009 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: > IMO understanding Forth implementation strategies is a diversion from > the objective of learning how to use it in *applications*, which is > its purpose. It seems to me that a lot of Forth's design is driven by enabling the implementation of Forth in Forth. That is, Forth *is* a Forth application, maybe even an archetypal application. I've found eForth (Bill Muench's original version, not one of the ports) to be the most enlightening and understandable Forth implementations that I've looked at so far.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 15:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words |
| Message-ID | <a96a3107-2e69-4ef9-8451-fba5a480be3c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57009 |
On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 10:57:44 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 4/9/17 11:41 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > > It is somewhat unpleasant to talk about a mess, but of you want to > > understand the internals of a Forth, a fig source may be better than > > e.g. Gforth's source. > > yourforth, jonesforth and ciforth may be as good as figForth in this > > respect. > > That kind of study will show you the internals of *some* Forths, but > they vary significantly from each other as well as from Fig and current > standards. Each Forth implementation has its own objective (conceptual > simplicity, performance, features, etc.). IMO understanding Forth > implementation strategies is a diversion from the objective of learning > how to use it in *applications*, which is its purpose. If your personal > objective is to understand the internals, that will be best served by > acquiring skills in using Forth for applications first, and then you > will be able to judge how a particular implementation strategy serves > its objectives. Nobody is writing application programs in ANS-Forth. In this thread, Darin started work on a video game, which is an application program. He got a death threat from Julien Fondren who was criticizing his variable names for being hard to read. That has got to dampen his enthusiasm! Then I wrote the video game, but doing so exposed two problems: 1.) ANS-Forth banned TICKS to prevent video games from being written. 2.) VFX has a bug in AT-XY. So far, as usual, I'm the only person who has written any code. For me, writing a program like that is pretty easy. I can knock something like that out pretty quickly --- I would have had it out sooner, but I had to work around the AT-XY problem (originally I wanted to use AT-XY to just display the player and monsters as they are the only things that move, rather than display the entire board). ANS-Forth is a cult. All of the cult members spend all of their time declaring themselves to be big experts. They don't write code, partially because they aren't any good at programming, and partially because they know that doing so is only possible by working around the design flaws in ANS-Forth and this requires them to admit that there are design flaws. Your entire career is based upon teaching Forth. Why didn't you write the video game as a demonstration for Darin? Obviously, because such a program is far beyond your ability. You aren't a programmer at all --- you are incapable of writing even a very simple program --- you post code snippets from the "Starting Forth" book because you can be sure that the code works and you believe that because it was written by Charles Moore it must be a good example. You attract cultists such as Julien Fondren etc. because you give them a haven where they can attack people and, so long as they remain loyal to you, retain their high status in the cult.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 13:24 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words |
| Message-ID | <58ecd69b.260978128@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #57020 |
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 15:57:08 -0700 (PDT), hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >Nobody is writing application programs in ANS-Forth. Absolute rubbish. You have been told about current Forth applications many times, but you refuse to acknowledge them. Your loss. >video game, but doing so exposed two problems:=20 >1.) ANS-Forth banned TICKS to prevent video games from being written. >2.) VFX has a bug in AT-XY. All systems provide a counter of some resolution. All you have to do is write an RfC if you care enough and are mentally tough enough. The VFX Forth for Windows console is not a proper cursor addressable console. To use one of those, see Lib\Win32\Genio\Terminal.fth It's documented in the manual. 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 | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 01:32 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words |
| Message-ID | <9f07eb47-ecbf-4693-8f3b-845dc9efc799@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57043 |
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 6:24:48 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote: > On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 15:57:08 -0700 (PDT), hughaguilar96@gmail.com > wrote: > > >Nobody is writing application programs in ANS-Forth. > > Absolute rubbish. You have been told about current Forth applications > many times, but you refuse to acknowledge them. Your loss. You yourself don't program in ANS-Forth. Your SYNONYM is a typical example. You made this VFX-specific despite the fact that it is trivial to write in ANS-Forth (given the disambiguifiers). You want to trap Forth programmers in vendor lock-in --- they use SYNONYM and they fall into your trap --- they can't escape from VFX (except by using my SYNONYM FAST-SYNONYM or ALIAS that are written in ANS-Forth). You rely on intimidation. When the subject of SYNONYM came up, you insulted me by saying: "RTFM!" This is just bullying --- this may work on people with marginal Forth skill and shaky self-confidence --- it doesn't work on me. I can write better Forth code than any Forth-200x committee member on any day that ends in a 'y'. Another example is my rquotations that work under both VFX and SwiftForth --- I made Bernd Paysan look like an idiot! --- his Paysan-faked quotations that are just syntactic sugar for :NONAME are not quite in the same league as my rquotations. Your trick is that you purposely cripple the standard (first ANS-Forth and now Forth-200x) so that only toy programs can be written in standard Forth (actually, without TICKS not even toy programs such as my ARENA.4TH are possible). You do this for the purpose of making VFX look good by comparison --- but VFX costs money, which goes into your pocket --- I'm not trying to stop you from making money, but I think that you are the worst person in the world to be defining the standard for Forth because you are financially motivated to cripple the standard (a classic example of putting the fox in charge of guarding the hen house). You need to be more honest --- resign from the Forth-200x committee on the grounds that you have a conflict of interest --- focus on selling VFX, and stop telling the world that you are my leader. Elizabeth Rather has repeatedly said that the purpose of ANS-Forth is not portable programs, but rather "portable programmers." The idea here is that people can learn Forth using a purposely crippled Forth system and then they can become "portable programmers" by upgrading to SwiftForth or VFX --- but their programs will no longer be standard --- the standard was like a bicycle with training wheels that helps people get started but has no practical value. > >video game, but doing so exposed two problems:=20 > >1.) ANS-Forth banned TICKS to prevent video games from being written. > >2.) VFX has a bug in AT-XY. > > All systems provide a counter of some resolution. All you have to > do is write an RfC if you care enough and are mentally tough enough. An RfD for Forth-200x? I was kicked out of Forth-200x. It is your own employee Peter Knaggs who runs the Forth-200x mailing list --- he does what you tell him to do, because you sign his paycheck --- his sole purpose of being on the Forth-200x committee is so MPE will have two votes rather than one (maybe later you can get Juegen Pintaske and Barto Gillespie appointed to the committee so MPE can have four votes). Anyway, I'm not going to approach the Forth-200x committee on my knees begging for TICKS or anything else --- to hell with the Forth-200x committee! > The VFX Forth for Windows console is not a proper cursor addressable > console. To use one of those, see > Lib\Win32\Genio\Terminal.fth > It's documented in the manual. The failure of AT-XY is not documented in the VFX manual. I searched on "AT-XY" and found only a few mentions (primarily page 65), none of which said that it doesn't work under the Windows version of VFX. I just discovered that AT-XY doesn't work because, through experimentation, I found that its behavior was bizarre. I originally thought that my ARENA.4TH had a bug, but then realized that my code was fine and it was AT-XY that was not working.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 23:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kHUGA.708089$3a3.665771@fx43.am4> |
| In reply to | #56968 |
rickman wrote: > On 4/8/2017 12:53 PM, Darin Murpy wrote: > > There is some irony in the fact that of the systems that host a real OS, > the RaspberryPi is the only one I am aware of that offers a usable bare > iron Forth and I'm not sure the the Forth OS on the rPi is actually very > complete. I think these days you have a choice of running under an OS > or working with a very limited system. Yes, I'm planning on getting a Raspberry Pi B+ to experiment using pijforth which works with the Raspberry Pi B. > > > Huh? I don't think I've heard of a Fig Forth that runs under any OS. I > suppose you could grab one of the many Fig Forths written to run on a > small CPU and run it on an emulator under DOS or Windows. I believe > someone has done that for the PDP-11 Fig Forth. I helped him copy some > PDFs into text files. I can't recall his name, but I can dig it up if > you are interested. Your right! I was mistaken about the FigForth running on DOS and after looking over the Forth's that did run on it (FPC386 for one) I won't be going that route. > > > I have no idea what "mess" you are talking about. Man where have you been living these last 30 years? I am a retired IT Support Technician who had been supporting PCs, Servers, general networks, printers, etc for over twenty years. I started out of a flea market in my twenties to supporting Sun Microsystems, Meag Power, Moen, Intercontinental Hotels, just to name a few and I know a lot about the mess we call modern operating systems and modern programming languages. 30 years ago it was the hardware that was a mess with all of the clones and everybody having their own OS, and nobody could talk to anyone else's stuff. Now it's the software that is a complete bloated, bug ridden mess. When you need over a giga byte just for your operating systems than your in trouble and that not talking about the gigabytes just to run a halfway decent word processor. It's a mess and all of it is the fault of the consumer, the publishers who push the developers past the point of realism and the developers for using bug ridden, bloated programming languages to start off with. Trust me it is a mess and it will stay that way until it gets so bad that the consumer grabs pitch forks and start lynching people or until people realize you using garbage to make something will only lead you to something that is garbage. Garbage in = garbage out! KISS is not just a cute message it's the only way to do it unless you want bloated bug ridden garbage and whoever came up with the term "Good enough" had to be a salesman. > > I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt with wanting to learn > Forth. I find it interesting when people come here looking to learn > about Forth and quickly start explaining how the Forth they find isn't > the Forth they are looking for and so they start criticizing it. I > think I may have gone through that phase myself at one point. Well I think that's because the forth they learn about is the Forth prior to modernizing and standardizing it. I don't know about other people but I found Forth by searching for unique programming languages and started reading things that Mr. Moore and Jeff Fox wrote about. Then I hunted for Forth tutorials with reviews "Starting Forth" had great reviews and a Forth that ran on my Tablet and/or my Raspberry Pi 3, which was Gforth. GForth is not like Mr. Moores Forth, but it kind of reminds me a little of it and so far it has gotten me to Chapter 10 of "Starting Forth", so it works for now. > > The beauty of Forth is if you don't like what you find, you are always > free to create your own. Let us know when you have done that. I'd be > interested in what you end up with and just how useful it is to someone > wanting to learn how to use a modern Forth. Have you considered that > maybe the Forths are fine and it is the Starting Forth book that needs > to be updated? :) > Exactly! Take care now, Darin Murphy
[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