Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #49933 > unrolled thread
| Started by | foxaudioresearch@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-10 13:06 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-08-28 22:34 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 202 — 33 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
"Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-10 13:06 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-10 21:00 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 23:26 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 00:25 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 01:29 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 16:09 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-11 19:31 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-12 12:22 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 19:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-11 18:23 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 21:57 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" mhx@iae.nl - 2016-08-11 23:20 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 23:49 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-15 08:52 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 02:31 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-15 22:43 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-08-15 14:49 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-08-21 21:24 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-08-22 07:04 +0300
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2016-08-26 07:12 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 09:18 +0300
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 21:12 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 00:04 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 01:34 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 02:17 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 08:53 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 11:54 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 17:38 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 20:02 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-15 07:10 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-08-15 08:34 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-15 01:11 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 21:23 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-28 14:26 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-29 01:44 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 00:45 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 14:56 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 15:02 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 22:05 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 21:05 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 22:15 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 23:39 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 00:03 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-13 00:07 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 07:35 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 17:17 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 20:04 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 20:38 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 20:46 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 06:02 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-14 23:04 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 16:01 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-13 21:53 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 07:45 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-08-15 06:44 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-08-14 19:57 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-14 11:17 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 13:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-14 14:09 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 15:48 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-14 18:34 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 02:24 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-20 19:26 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 14:58 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-21 15:51 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-21 15:52 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-24 16:35 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2016-08-14 10:32 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 13:55 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 21:37 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-28 15:25 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2016-08-28 16:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-28 16:44 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 20:00 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 20:39 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-12 22:11 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" dhoffman888@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 03:39 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 20:18 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 22:35 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 22:52 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 22:55 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2016-08-13 11:31 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-15 11:47 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-15 12:05 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-15 08:21 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 22:54 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-12 14:51 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 21:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-13 18:04 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 23:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-13 18:47 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 22:59 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 20:54 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 12:36 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 15:10 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 17:45 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-15 18:40 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 20:18 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:18 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-10 15:38 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-10 16:18 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-11 11:39 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 00:23 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 01:56 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 20:28 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 00:23 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-11 11:26 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 11:06 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 11:51 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 01:48 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 01:52 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 09:42 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 13:36 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 07:06 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 14:10 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 00:46 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-16 00:57 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 04:45 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 02:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 03:04 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-18 09:30 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 07:44 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-18 11:36 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 13:41 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-18 14:01 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 14:33 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 16:23 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 17:28 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 18:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 19:07 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 01:09 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-18 17:21 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 23:36 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 00:11 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 01:44 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 01:46 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:29 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-31 03:43 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-19 03:49 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 02:18 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-20 05:05 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 15:13 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-21 16:33 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 19:37 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-21 20:02 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-21 21:36 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-22 03:36 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-19 08:40 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 15:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-19 16:28 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 16:31 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-19 17:24 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 19:48 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-19 20:17 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 02:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 02:19 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 03:13 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 07:03 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-20 12:21 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 20:39 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-20 15:41 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-20 14:40 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-20 17:25 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-20 20:14 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" julian.fondren@endurance.com - 2016-08-20 20:30 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-21 13:46 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-21 20:13 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 12:37 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-21 21:11 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-21 13:19 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 19:03 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-22 06:45 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-21 21:38 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:43 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-21 08:57 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:40 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-21 09:57 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 11:29 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 11:56 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 12:11 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 12:26 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-21 12:52 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-22 07:12 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 23:43 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-21 21:40 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-22 17:20 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 13:01 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 13:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-21 20:19 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-08-21 17:41 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 02:09 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 20:04 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-19 09:40 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 13:48 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 01:13 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 04:26 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 03:06 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 11:54 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-26 20:43 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-27 04:20 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-08-28 00:04 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:34 +0200
Page 8 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 Next page →
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 05:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <y6ednS6LGpsYtiXKnZ2dnUU78UOdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #50242 |
lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, August 19, 2016 at 8:49:12 PM UTC+12, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> Lawrence D?Oliveiro wrote: >>> >>> Why not implement POSIX? >> >> It's big and not a great fit to Forth. > > Who says it?s big? It can be quite small if you want > <http://www.etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html>. "Small" is relative. It's bigger than Forth. >> It's C and UNIX: a very different philosophy of language and operating >> system. > > It's a modular philosophy. For example, the Linux kernel can be > built with just the features that you want. And those features can > be statically linked in, or they can be dynamically loaded on > demand. Sure, but it's very different. >> Forth threads don't need all the facilities of POSIX. > > Maybe you should provide them. That would ease portability. I don't believe that. The philosophy of Forth is to include what's needed, and no more. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lawrencedo99@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 15:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fa0ad177-017e-423c-bcbd-eb9763466e4e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50274 |
On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 10:05:59 PM UTC+12, Andrew Haley wrote: > > Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> It's a modular philosophy. For example, the Linux kernel can be >> built with just the features that you want. And those features can >> be statically linked in, or they can be dynamically loaded on >> demand. > > Sure, but it's very different. Different how? Not to be modular? To be monolithic instead? >>> Forth threads don't need all the facilities of POSIX. >> >> Maybe you should provide them. That would ease portability. > > I don't believe that. The philosophy of Forth is to include what's > needed, and no more. That philosophy seems to be an excuse to avoid standardizing on anything.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 16:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <zf2dnYdT7qSpgyfKnZ2dnUU7-UudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #50299 |
lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 10:05:59 PM UTC+12, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> Lawrence D?Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> It's a modular philosophy. For example, the Linux kernel can be >>> built with just the features that you want. And those features can >>> be statically linked in, or they can be dynamically loaded on >>> demand. >> >> Sure, but it's very different. > > Different how? Not to be modular? To be monolithic instead? There's not much need to be modular in the same sense as a modular Linux kernel: Forth is small. And it's not like Linux, and it's not intended to be, and there's no poing having another one anyway. >>>> Forth threads don't need all the facilities of POSIX. >>> >>> Maybe you should provide them. That would ease portability. >> >> I don't believe that. The philosophy of Forth is to include what's >> needed, and no more. > > That philosophy seems to be an excuse to avoid standardizing on > anything. And yet, stuff has been standarized. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lawrencedo99@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 19:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8f614345-38db-4e80-b798-a85f5c0ce883@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50358 |
On Monday, August 22, 2016 at 9:33:45 AM UTC+12, Andrew Haley wrote: > Lawrence D”Oliveiro wrote: >> On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 10:05:59 PM UTC+12, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> >>> Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>> >>>> It's a modular philosophy. For example, the Linux kernel can be >>>> built with just the features that you want. And those features can >>>> be statically linked in, or they can be dynamically loaded on >>>> demand. >>> >>> Sure, but it's very different. >> >> Different how? Not to be modular? To be monolithic instead? > > There's not much need to be modular in the same sense as a modular > Linux kernel: Forth is small. Must it always remain small? No adaptation to new applications, new requirements, new scenarios? Is Forth the Peter Pan of programming languages, sworn never to grow up?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 20:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87wpj9qze7.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> |
| In reply to | #50374 |
lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: > Is Forth the Peter Pan of programming languages, sworn never to grow up? Do you ever actually code anything in Forth?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-21 21:36 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <XNSdnRGG8fkRNifKnZ2dnUU7-b3NnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #50374 |
On 8/21/16 4:37 PM, lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, August 22, 2016 at 9:33:45 AM UTC+12, Andrew Haley wrote: >> Lawrence D”Oliveiro wrote: >>> On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 10:05:59 PM UTC+12, Andrew Haley wrote: >>>> >>>> Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>>> >>>>> It's a modular philosophy. For example, the Linux kernel can be >>>>> built with just the features that you want. And those features can >>>>> be statically linked in, or they can be dynamically loaded on >>>>> demand. >>>> >>>> Sure, but it's very different. >>> >>> Different how? Not to be modular? To be monolithic instead? >> >> There's not much need to be modular in the same sense as a modular >> Linux kernel: Forth is small. > > Must it always remain small? No adaptation to new applications, new requirements, new scenarios? > > Is Forth the Peter Pan of programming languages, sworn never to grow up? It's small to start with, and the incremental size to add new capabilities and application requirements still takes far less memory than other languages. 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 | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-22 03:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <F4Cdnei7bJ8TJCfKnZ2dnUU7-T2dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #50374 |
lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, August 22, 2016 at 9:33:45 AM UTC+12, Andrew Haley wrote: >> There's not much need to be modular in the same sense as a modular >> Linux kernel: Forth is small. > > Must it always remain small? Yes. > No adaptation to new applications, new requirements, new scenarios? No, being small does not imply that. On the contrary, small systems are easier to adapt and maintain. > Is Forth the Peter Pan of programming languages, sworn never to grow > up? No. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 08:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <np727k$26c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #50235 |
On 8/19/2016 1:36 AM, lehs wrote: > Den fredag 19 augusti 2016 kl. 05:21:50 UTC+2 skrev Elizabeth D. Rather: >> On 8/17/16 11:16 PM, lehs wrote: >>> I guess that Forth is more of an idea than a computer language and that the idea of Forth will develop as other good ideas develop in a long-term perspective. Charles Moore have said that Forth is an approach to programming and he never seems to use any standards. I guess he use no libraries neither, but copy and paste from his own code. >>> >>> I think a lot of forthers is a bit like Charles Moore. It's all about the idea and our own code. I rather use a less effective code (in progress) of my own, than some alien code by someone else, especially when it comes to packages. What I do use is others definitions and Forth implementations. And I also like to test other peoples code from time to time, last the fancy Lisp implementation that humptydumpty manage to get running. And I want the possibility of other people to run my code if they want. >>> >>> The CORE and DOUBLE words in ANS Forth are the most important definitions to be standardized. And they shouldn't change from standard to standard. FLOATING and FILE are nice but could maybe be developed further. Personally I'm not interested at all in future implementations of various computer scientific ideas that maybe not belong in Forth at all. >>> >>> Recognizers seems to be a good idea if implemented in a smart and simple way. From there really nice implementations of new data types would be possible. >>> >>> Also, why are there no discussion of a standard for rudimentary graphic words? Or are there? >>> >> >> There was a fairly graphics library in polyFORTH. If there is interest, >> I could investigate getting it published. It would have to be modified >> to ANS Forth or Forth2012. >> >> 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." >> ================================================== > > That graphic library could be nice to see. But I think standard Forth has to be more and more like an operating system with standard words for access to a lot of devices, which should be implemented by the Forth vendors. That would at least increase portability and maybe make libraries more attractive. > Eventually it needs to be recognized that desktop and embedded programs have totally different requirements, and the Standard needs to recognize that. The embedded applications need like you mentioned access to the hardware in the devices being programmed while the desktop applications has different needs such as access to the underlying OS and it's functions. -- Cecil - k5nwa
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 15:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f9eb264b-ee3d-4798-ac19-a2c815ba81f6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50248 |
Forget it! It's 2016 and we don't have a standard way to open an obsolete serial port, much less a socket, or invoke various screen resolutions and bit depths. I feel your pain.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 16:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87lgzstk3d.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> |
| In reply to | #50261 |
Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> writes: > Forget it! It's 2016 and we don't have a standard way to open an > obsolete serial port, much less a socket, or invoke various screen > resolutions and bit depths. I feel your pain. I don't know of any language spec that says how to do those things. That's left to OS API specs like POSIX, if anything.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lawrencedo99@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 16:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3df7e7c1-9b33-450d-89b3-a66c9ea9f859@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50262 |
On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 11:28:07 AM UTC+12, Paul Rubin wrote: > Mark Wills writes: > > Forget it! It's 2016 and we don't have a standard way to open an > > obsolete serial port, much less a socket, or invoke various screen > > resolutions and bit depths. I feel your pain. > > I don't know of any language spec that says how to do those things. > That's left to OS API specs like POSIX, if anything. C++, at least, wants to add a 2D graphics API, based on Cairo, as a standard part of the language <https://isocpp.org/blog/2014/01/n3888>.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 17:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87h9agthh5.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> |
| In reply to | #50263 |
lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: > C++, at least, wants to add a 2D graphics API, based on Cairo, as a > standard part of the language <https://isocpp.org/blog/2014/01/n3888>. Hmm, interesting, but it didn't seem to get any traction. I think lots of real-world Forth code runs in headless embedded devices though, so standardizing graphics doesn't seem like a great place to start.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lawrencedo99@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 19:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cf8a1cde-8fd6-40ae-be87-0af85b8d0064@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50265 |
On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 12:24:39 PM UTC+12, Paul Rubin wrote: > I think lots of real-world Forth code runs in headless embedded devices > though, so standardizing graphics doesn't seem like a great place to > start. Given the number of “smart” devices with screens nowadays, you at least want the option as part of your modular toolkit, so you can choose to build/install it if needed as part of a job.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 20:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87d1l4t9gv.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> |
| In reply to | #50267 |
lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: > Given the number of “smart” devices with screens nowadays I wonder how many commonalities they have. There are Arduino interfaces for some of them. Those might be a reasonable place to look for inspiration. This is all vague and abstract though. I'd be interested to know of some specific devices and applications you'd like to suport.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 02:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ece90f62-3b2a-479a-9574-116d7f20403c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50268 |
On Saturday, 20 August 2016 04:17:38 UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote: > lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: > > Given the number of “smart” devices with screens nowadays > > I wonder how many commonalities they have. There are Arduino interfaces > for some of them. Those might be a reasonable place to look for > inspiration. > > This is all vague and abstract though. I'd be interested to know of > some specific devices and applications you'd like to suport. Seriously, start with a serial port! With a serial port on the Arduino, I can: * Use a bluetooth adapter (cost: approx $3, about 2cm square) you communicate with it with good old fashioned AT modem commands once it's set up it's transparent. Just code as if you have a wired serial port. * Use a WIFI adapter. It does the TCP/IP and DHCP. * Use a USB serial port adapter (the Windows/Linux box box sees your device as a virtual serial port and you can communicate via serial port). These devices cost a few bucks on eBay. Then I2C and open up the world of OLED screens and SD card readers. Perhaps we should have a separate embedded standard.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 02:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <89b5f1f5-260d-499f-845d-c63d226faafd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50272 |
On Saturday, 20 August 2016 10:16:08 UTC+1, Mark Wills wrote: > On Saturday, 20 August 2016 04:17:38 UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote: > > lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: > > > Given the number of “smart” devices with screens nowadays > > > > I wonder how many commonalities they have. There are Arduino interfaces > > for some of them. Those might be a reasonable place to look for > > inspiration. > > > > This is all vague and abstract though. I'd be interested to know of > > some specific devices and applications you'd like to suport. > > Seriously, start with a serial port! > > With a serial port on the Arduino, I can: > > * Use a bluetooth adapter (cost: approx $3, about 2cm square) > you communicate with it with good old fashioned AT modem commands > once it's set up it's transparent. Just code as if you have a wired > serial port. > * Use a WIFI adapter. It does the TCP/IP and DHCP. > * Use a USB serial port adapter (the Windows/Linux box box sees your > device as a virtual serial port and you can communicate via serial > port). > > These devices cost a few bucks on eBay. > > Then I2C and open up the world of OLED screens and SD card readers. > > Perhaps we should have a separate embedded standard. I should point out that (at least) the authors of noForth and AmForth have already done this stuff (AmForth on the Arduino, too) and are just quietly getting on with it!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 03:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5ddc060d-b992-48d0-9da4-f52ed1a9a837@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50273 |
On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 4:19:05 AM UTC-5, Mark Wills wrote: > > > > Seriously, start with a serial port! > > So you were actually *serious*, all those times that you said "how can you even be talking about this stuff, not even opening a serial port is standard." ? I don't care about serial ports. With the effort you've put into talking about them, I didn't think you cared either. > > With a serial port on the Arduino, I can: > > > > * Use a bluetooth adapter (cost: approx $3, about 2cm square) > > you communicate with it with good old fashioned AT modem commands > > once it's set up it's transparent. Just code as if you have a wired > > serial port. > > * Use a WIFI adapter. It does the TCP/IP and DHCP. > > * Use a USB serial port adapter (the Windows/Linux box box sees your > > device as a virtual serial port and you can communicate via serial > > port). > > > > These devices cost a few bucks on eBay. > > > > Then I2C and open up the world of OLED screens and SD card readers. > > > > I should point out that (at least) the authors of noForth and AmForth > have already done this stuff (AmForth on the Arduino, too) and are > just quietly getting on with it! That's what everyone does who does anything beyond the standard. gforth on Android has implemented a bunch of OpenGL stuff and is quietly getting on with it. Every system has their own multitasking library that does its thing -- there are some similarities in words used ( USER PAUSE ) but none of the code can be ported without effort. For a difference that's typical of the two systems, SwiftForth's PAUSE just calls pthread_yield while VFX's PAUSE hooks into some architecture to support event handling between threads. If you want to seriously suggest that opening a serial port be in the standard, then a serious way to start would be to survey current usage and report on it. If everyone's quietly doing their own thing, how much alike are their own things? They could be all using the same word for the same purpose with very slight differences that don't affect *most* uses (do APPEND and PLACE also append a trailing zero byte?), or they could be using different words for the same purposes with the exact same effect, etc. > > Perhaps we should have a separate embedded standard. The standard already doesn't require that everybody implement every wordset. These words could just go in a wordset that only embedded systems might care to implement. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | foxaudioresearch@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 07:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9a2b3c38-f34b-459e-b07a-b448d5007139@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50272 |
On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 5:16:08 AM UTC-4, Mark Wills wrote: > On Saturday, 20 August 2016 04:17:38 UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote: > > lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: > > > Given the number of “smart” devices with screens nowadays > > > > I wonder how many commonalities they have. There are Arduino interfaces > > for some of them. Those might be a reasonable place to look for > > inspiration. > > > > This is all vague and abstract though. I'd be interested to know of > > some specific devices and applications you'd like to suport. > > Seriously, start with a serial port! > > With a serial port on the Arduino, I can: > > * Use a bluetooth adapter (cost: approx $3, about 2cm square) > you communicate with it with good old fashioned AT modem commands > once it's set up it's transparent. Just code as if you have a wired > serial port. > * Use a WIFI adapter. It does the TCP/IP and DHCP. > * Use a USB serial port adapter (the Windows/Linux box box sees your > device as a virtual serial port and you can communicate via serial > port). > > These devices cost a few bucks on eBay. > > Then I2C and open up the world of OLED screens and SD card readers. > > Perhaps we should have a separate embedded standard. I agree with you Mark. I had to make a word set for com ports in 1992 when I first bought a commercial Forth that had very little support for com ports and my project was connecting multiple systems via RS232. I was not happy. As I mentioned there is a lot on internally focused thought among Forth advocates, yet in other realms of computer language, the language is more closed and so effort is applied to higher level thinking by necessity. Somehow the thought leadership in Forth needs to create the layers that make the language accessible to the "great un-washed". That is IF we want the language to have a larger user group. BF
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 12:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <npa3id$3ls$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #50277 |
On 8/20/2016 9:03 AM, foxaudioresearch@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 5:16:08 AM UTC-4, Mark Wills wrote: >> On Saturday, 20 August 2016 04:17:38 UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote: >>> lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: >>>> Given the number of “smart” devices with screens nowadays >>> >>> I wonder how many commonalities they have. There are Arduino interfaces >>> for some of them. Those might be a reasonable place to look for >>> inspiration. >>> >>> This is all vague and abstract though. I'd be interested to know of >>> some specific devices and applications you'd like to suport. >> >> Seriously, start with a serial port! >> >> With a serial port on the Arduino, I can: >> >> * Use a bluetooth adapter (cost: approx $3, about 2cm square) >> you communicate with it with good old fashioned AT modem commands >> once it's set up it's transparent. Just code as if you have a wired >> serial port. >> * Use a WIFI adapter. It does the TCP/IP and DHCP. >> * Use a USB serial port adapter (the Windows/Linux box box sees your >> device as a virtual serial port and you can communicate via serial >> port). >> >> These devices cost a few bucks on eBay. >> >> Then I2C and open up the world of OLED screens and SD card readers. >> >> Perhaps we should have a separate embedded standard. > > I agree with you Mark. I had to make a word set for com ports in 1992 when > I first bought a commercial Forth that had very little support for com ports > and my project was connecting multiple systems via RS232. I was not happy. > > As I mentioned there is a lot on internally focused thought among Forth > advocates, yet in other realms of computer language, the language is more > closed and so effort is applied to higher level thinking by necessity. > > Somehow the thought leadership in Forth needs to create the layers that make the > language accessible to the "great un-washed". > > That is IF we want the language to have a larger user group. > > > BF > Some rather be kings of a heap of ashes rather just one of the boys so I would not place a lot of hope that they will lift Forth from it's current status, a useless toy with tremendous lost potential. Enhance the Forth you use to make a usable tool and disregard what the "experts" say. Take the ANS Standard as an example, a mess of contradictions and ambiguities with missing critical pieces, so what is being done? More of the same, doubling down on past mistakes, a Standard that approves everything that existed beforehand, after all we wouldn't want to hurt peoples feelings, but it's meaningless. Even the major players disregard it to make their products usable. -- Cecil - k5nwa
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 20:39 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1xpqu044ht68t.gd9k4bzxkk0l.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #50280 |
Op Sat, 20 Aug 2016 12:21:15 -0500 schreef Cecil Bayona: > On 8/20/2016 9:03 AM, foxaudioresearch@gmail.com wrote: >> On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 5:16:08 AM UTC-4, Mark Wills wrote: >>> On Saturday, 20 August 2016 04:17:38 UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote: >>>> lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: >>>>> Given the number of “smart” devices with screens nowadays >>>> >>>> I wonder how many commonalities they have. There are Arduino interfaces >>>> for some of them. Those might be a reasonable place to look for >>>> inspiration. >>>> >>>> This is all vague and abstract though. I'd be interested to know of >>>> some specific devices and applications you'd like to suport. >>> >>> Seriously, start with a serial port! >>> >>> With a serial port on the Arduino, I can: >>> >>> * Use a bluetooth adapter (cost: approx $3, about 2cm square) >>> you communicate with it with good old fashioned AT modem commands >>> once it's set up it's transparent. Just code as if you have a wired >>> serial port. >>> * Use a WIFI adapter. It does the TCP/IP and DHCP. >>> * Use a USB serial port adapter (the Windows/Linux box box sees your >>> device as a virtual serial port and you can communicate via serial >>> port). >>> >>> These devices cost a few bucks on eBay. >>> >>> Then I2C and open up the world of OLED screens and SD card readers. >>> >>> Perhaps we should have a separate embedded standard. >> >> I agree with you Mark. I had to make a word set for com ports in 1992 when >> I first bought a commercial Forth that had very little support for com ports >> and my project was connecting multiple systems via RS232. I was not happy. >> >> As I mentioned there is a lot on internally focused thought among Forth >> advocates, yet in other realms of computer language, the language is more >> closed and so effort is applied to higher level thinking by necessity. >> >> Somehow the thought leadership in Forth needs to create the layers that make the >> language accessible to the "great un-washed". >> >> That is IF we want the language to have a larger user group. >> >> >> BF >> > Some rather be kings of a heap of ashes rather just one of the boys so I > would not place a lot of hope that they will lift Forth from it's > current status, a useless toy with tremendous lost potential. Enhance > the Forth you use to make a usable tool and disregard what the "experts" > say. > > Take the ANS Standard as an example, a mess of contradictions and > ambiguities with missing critical pieces, so what is being done? More of > the same, doubling down on past mistakes, a Standard that approves > everything that existed beforehand, after all we wouldn't want to hurt > peoples feelings, but it's meaningless. Even the major players disregard > it to make their products usable. Now spit it out: what contradictions are in the 94 or 2012 standards? I have seen enough of these grandiose meaningless explications. groet Coos
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web