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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #51465 > unrolled thread

Gforth snapshot for Windows

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

Contents

  Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-09-30 01:33 +0000
    Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 15:16 +0100
      Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-09-30 16:26 +0000
        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-09-30 19:50 +0100
          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-09-30 20:34 +0000
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-10-02 11:14 +0100
              Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-02 16:29 +0000
                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-02 22:47 +0000
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows jjmail9@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 04:45 -0700
          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@zxdehrnyya.cam> - 2016-09-30 17:28 -0400
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-09-30 22:14 +0000
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-10-01 19:42 +0100
          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-01 07:08 +0000
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-10-02 11:23 +0100
              Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-02 16:14 +0000
                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-10-02 12:14 -0500
                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-02 19:45 +0200
                  Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-03 07:43 +0000
                  Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-10-03 12:51 +0100
          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-10-02 12:07 +0100
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-02 22:39 +0000
        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-30 14:36 -0700
          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-01 07:46 +0000
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-01 12:12 -0700
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 19:51 -0700
        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-09-30 22:09 +0000
          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-30 13:25 -1000
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-02 00:10 +0000
              Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-10-01 15:31 -1000
                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-02 23:00 +0000
                  Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-10-02 21:32 -1000
                    Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-10-03 03:46 -0500
                      Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-10-02 23:25 -1000
                      Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-03 12:57 +0200
                        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 04:31 -0700
                  Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-04 09:18 +0000
                    Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-04 21:57 +0000
                      Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows jjmail9@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 06:47 -0700
                        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-21 20:22 +0000
                    Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-10-04 12:40 -1000
                      Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows jjmail9@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 08:37 -0700
                        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-10-19 11:29 -0500
                          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows jjmail9@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 12:03 -0700
                        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-20 12:15 +0000
                          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-10-20 07:36 -1000
                            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-21 07:15 +0000
                              Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-10-21 22:12 -1000
                                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-22 12:12 +0200
                                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-22 13:52 +0000
                    Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows jjmail9@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 05:57 -0700
    Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-30 10:17 -0700
    Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Philip Smith <philipkingsmith@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 11:45 -0700
    Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows beeflo <beeflobill@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 10:51 -0700
      Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-11 20:44 +0000
        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2016-10-12 01:02 +0100
          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-13 00:26 +0000
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2016-10-13 08:48 +0100
              Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 01:09 -0700
                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-14 23:39 +0000
            Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-10-14 18:05 +0100
              Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-14 23:29 +0000
                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-15 16:26 +0000
                Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-17 00:52 +0000
                  Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-10-19 10:50 +0100
        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Spiros Lakkos <slakkos@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-12 06:50 +0300
      Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-10-11 22:42 -0700
        Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows beeflo <beeflobill@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 09:41 -0700
          Re: Gforth snapshot for Windows Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-10-12 23:46 +0000

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#51552

Am Sun, 02 Oct 2016 12:07:37 +0100 schrieb Gerry Jackson:

> On 30/09/2016 19:50, Gerry Jackson wrote:
>>> 6) May not be your problem but when the console window is resized any
>>> text displayed disappears, but GForth is still working.
> 
> I just noticed it happens with my system as well. It looks like
> Microsoft introduced this feature with Windows 10. Aren't they
> wonderful.

Yes, but that's why the Gforth distribution comes with mintty. Mintty 
doesn't have this problem.

The problem of the Windows console affects all programs using it, 
including the Linux mode.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
http://bernd-paysan.de/

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

#51488

anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
> Gforth now contains a word B.

Is that really necessary?

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

#51503

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
>> Gforth now contains a word B.
>
>Is that really necessary?

Depends on who you ask.  But any words consisting only of hex digits
have the same problem.  In particular, there is a standard word
FE. that has this problem.

The classical solution is not to avoid these word names, but to prefix
all numbers with a 0 that would otherwise start with a letter.  These
days, we can do better, and prefix the numbers with "$".

- 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]

#51510

anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
>>> Gforth now contains a word B.
>>Is that really necessary?
> Depends on who you ask.  But any words consisting only of hex digits
> have the same problem.

I wasn't even thinking about hex digits.  While trying things out or
testing with Forth it's pretty convenient to use one-letter names for
symbols.  There are already a few in use but adding more seems a bit
annoying.

OTOH, I didn't know that B was used by Forth systems historically, so I
guess that helps.

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

#51558

On Saturday, October 1, 2016 at 8:52:14 PM UTC+13, Anton Ertl wrote:
> These days, we can do better, and prefix the numbers with "$".

I like the more general convention of «base»#«digits», where «base» can be any integer from 2 to 36 inclusive. For example

    36#1i = 13#42 = 54

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

#51489

Am Fri, 30 Sep 2016 16:26:45 +0000 schrieb Anton Ertl:

> Gforth now contains a word B.  Maybe we should warn about using numbers
> that don't start with 0-9 or a prefix, too.

Hm, or maybe B is a bad word ;-).  But we also have L and N now, too, and 
those would make that test fail, as well.  SwiftForth has L N B as well, 
and that's the inspiration for these words.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
http://bernd-paysan.de/

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

#51493

On 9/30/16 12:09 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> Am Fri, 30 Sep 2016 16:26:45 +0000 schrieb Anton Ertl:
>
>> Gforth now contains a word B.  Maybe we should warn about using numbers
>> that don't start with 0-9 or a prefix, too.
>
> Hm, or maybe B is a bad word ;-).  But we also have L and N now, too, and
> those would make that test fail, as well.  SwiftForth has L N B as well,
> and that's the inspiration for these words.
>
L N and B were in Chuck's earliest Forths, and have been in FORTH, Inc. 
products forever. They are part of the IDE, moving forward ( N ), back ( 
B ) and re-displaying ( L ) in source: blocks back in the day, and 
source segments displayed by LOCATE in SwiftForth. I have never heard 
that they were a problem.

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]

#51514

Am Fri, 30 Sep 2016 13:25:46 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:
> L N and B were in Chuck's earliest Forths, and have been in FORTH, Inc.
> products forever. They are part of the IDE, moving forward ( N ), back (
> B ) and re-displaying ( L ) in source: blocks back in the day, and
> source segments displayed by LOCATE in SwiftForth. I have never heard
> that they were a problem.

Well, Gerry Jackson's test had a little problem ;-).  While Gforth didn't 
have a LOCATE until recently, we choose to follow Chuck's early Forth in 
syntax and semantics, when we finally implemented LOCATE.

However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor vocabulary, 
and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor vocabulary 
when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words like I (insert) 
did not collide with normal Forth words.

In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
http://bernd-paysan.de/

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

#51524

On 10/1/16 2:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> Am Fri, 30 Sep 2016 13:25:46 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:
>> L N and B were in Chuck's earliest Forths, and have been in FORTH, Inc.
>> products forever. They are part of the IDE, moving forward ( N ), back (
>> B ) and re-displaying ( L ) in source: blocks back in the day, and
>> source segments displayed by LOCATE in SwiftForth. I have never heard
>> that they were a problem.
>
> Well, Gerry Jackson's test had a little problem ;-).  While Gforth didn't
> have a LOCATE until recently, we choose to follow Chuck's early Forth in
> syntax and semantics, when we finally implemented LOCATE.
>
> However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor vocabulary,
> and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor vocabulary
> when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words like I (insert)
> did not collide with normal Forth words.
>
> In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.

True. SwiftForth doesn't have an internal editor, because it can 
interface well to external editors. Incidentally, there were 3 versions 
of I in earlier FORTH, Inc. products: the loop version, the editor 
version (Insert), and the assembler version (the register or location 
used for the Interpreter pointer), each in the appropriate wordlist, of 
course.

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]

#51554

Am Sat, 01 Oct 2016 15:31:03 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:

> On 10/1/16 2:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>> However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor
>> vocabulary, and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor
>> vocabulary when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words like
>> I (insert) did not collide with normal Forth words.
>>
>> In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.
> 
> True. SwiftForth doesn't have an internal editor, because it can
> interface well to external editors. Incidentally, there were 3 versions
> of I in earlier FORTH, Inc. products: the loop version, the editor
> version (Insert), and the assembler version (the register or location
> used for the Interpreter pointer), each in the appropriate wordlist, of
> course.

Still begs the question if resurrecting the EDITOR vocabulary for these 
few words might be useful.  Actually, the Gforth LOCATE browser does read 
in the file in a way that is usable for a PolyForth-style editor, and 
adding such a simple editor would be just a few dozen lines.  Or adding a 
full-screen editor maybe would be a line or two more (don't know how 
many ;-).  I would use the command line editor to edit the individual 
lines, which then would give features like tab completion "for free".

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
http://bernd-paysan.de/

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

#51559

On 10/2/16 1:00 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> Am Sat, 01 Oct 2016 15:31:03 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:
>
>> On 10/1/16 2:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>> However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor
>>> vocabulary, and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor
>>> vocabulary when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words like
>>> I (insert) did not collide with normal Forth words.
>>>
>>> In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.
>>
>> True. SwiftForth doesn't have an internal editor, because it can
>> interface well to external editors. Incidentally, there were 3 versions
>> of I in earlier FORTH, Inc. products: the loop version, the editor
>> version (Insert), and the assembler version (the register or location
>> used for the Interpreter pointer), each in the appropriate wordlist, of
>> course.
>
> Still begs the question if resurrecting the EDITOR vocabulary for these
> few words might be useful.

It could be done in a heartbeat if anyone complained of problems with 
these words. AFAIK no one has.

> Actually, the Gforth LOCATE browser does read
> in the file in a way that is usable for a PolyForth-style editor, and
> adding such a simple editor would be just a few dozen lines.  Or adding a
> full-screen editor maybe would be a line or two more (don't know how
> many ;-).  I would use the command line editor to edit the individual
> lines, which then would give features like tab completion "for free".

The basic polyFORTH editor was 16 lines, with a second block added to 
provide a "screen editor". It was discarded because most of our users 
preferred programmers' editors that they used in other projects, so it 
hardly seemed worthwhile to modify it to work in files rather than blocks.

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]

#51561

On 10/3/2016 2:32 AM, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> On 10/2/16 1:00 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>> Am Sat, 01 Oct 2016 15:31:03 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:
>>
>>> On 10/1/16 2:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>>> However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor
>>>> vocabulary, and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor
>>>> vocabulary when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words like
>>>> I (insert) did not collide with normal Forth words.
>>>>
>>>> In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.
>>>
>>> True. SwiftForth doesn't have an internal editor, because it can
>>> interface well to external editors. Incidentally, there were 3 versions
>>> of I in earlier FORTH, Inc. products: the loop version, the editor
>>> version (Insert), and the assembler version (the register or location
>>> used for the Interpreter pointer), each in the appropriate wordlist, of
>>> course.
>>
>> Still begs the question if resurrecting the EDITOR vocabulary for these
>> few words might be useful.
>
> It could be done in a heartbeat if anyone complained of problems with
> these words. AFAIK no one has.
>
>> Actually, the Gforth LOCATE browser does read
>> in the file in a way that is usable for a PolyForth-style editor, and
>> adding such a simple editor would be just a few dozen lines.  Or adding a
>> full-screen editor maybe would be a line or two more (don't know how
>> many ;-).  I would use the command line editor to edit the individual
>> lines, which then would give features like tab completion "for free".
>
> The basic polyFORTH editor was 16 lines, with a second block added to
> provide a "screen editor". It was discarded because most of our users
> preferred programmers' editors that they used in other projects, so it
> hardly seemed worthwhile to modify it to work in files rather than blocks.
>
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth
>
I could see where a block editor might be handy even as a general 
purpose editor, specially in embedded systems where the CPUs keep having 
more and more memory, some up to 2 Megabytes, plenty for programs and 
locally edit some files with a simple editor which might be faster than 
downloading the whole source from a PC.
-- 
Cecil - k5nwa

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

#51562

On 10/2/16 10:46 PM, Cecil Bayona wrote:
>
>
> On 10/3/2016 2:32 AM, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>> On 10/2/16 1:00 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>> Am Sat, 01 Oct 2016 15:31:03 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:
>>>
>>>> On 10/1/16 2:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>>>> However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor
>>>>> vocabulary, and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor
>>>>> vocabulary when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words
>>>>> like
>>>>> I (insert) did not collide with normal Forth words.
>>>>>
>>>>> In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.
>>>>
>>>> True. SwiftForth doesn't have an internal editor, because it can
>>>> interface well to external editors. Incidentally, there were 3 versions
>>>> of I in earlier FORTH, Inc. products: the loop version, the editor
>>>> version (Insert), and the assembler version (the register or location
>>>> used for the Interpreter pointer), each in the appropriate wordlist, of
>>>> course.
>>>
>>> Still begs the question if resurrecting the EDITOR vocabulary for these
>>> few words might be useful.
>>
>> It could be done in a heartbeat if anyone complained of problems with
>> these words. AFAIK no one has.
>>
>>> Actually, the Gforth LOCATE browser does read
>>> in the file in a way that is usable for a PolyForth-style editor, and
>>> adding such a simple editor would be just a few dozen lines.  Or
>>> adding a
>>> full-screen editor maybe would be a line or two more (don't know how
>>> many ;-).  I would use the command line editor to edit the individual
>>> lines, which then would give features like tab completion "for free".
>>
>> The basic polyFORTH editor was 16 lines, with a second block added to
>> provide a "screen editor". It was discarded because most of our users
>> preferred programmers' editors that they used in other projects, so it
>> hardly seemed worthwhile to modify it to work in files rather than
>> blocks.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Elizabeth
>>
> I could see where a block editor might be handy even as a general
> purpose editor, specially in embedded systems where the CPUs keep having
> more and more memory, some up to 2 Megabytes, plenty for programs and
> locally edit some files with a simple editor which might be faster than
> downloading the whole source from a PC.

Well, that's why we prefer working with an interactive cross-compiler. 
We can use full-function programmer's editors, have a much more powerful 
compiler, and download the compiled code in less than a second.

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]

#51563

In article <nst5tg$fnc$1@dont-email.me>,
Cecil Bayona  <cbayona@cbayona.com> wrote:
>
>
>On 10/3/2016 2:32 AM, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>> On 10/2/16 1:00 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>> Am Sat, 01 Oct 2016 15:31:03 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:
>>>
>>>> On 10/1/16 2:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>>>> However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor
>>>>> vocabulary, and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor
>>>>> vocabulary when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words like
>>>>> I (insert) did not collide with normal Forth words.
>>>>>
>>>>> In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.
>>>>
>>>> True. SwiftForth doesn't have an internal editor, because it can
>>>> interface well to external editors. Incidentally, there were 3 versions
>>>> of I in earlier FORTH, Inc. products: the loop version, the editor
>>>> version (Insert), and the assembler version (the register or location
>>>> used for the Interpreter pointer), each in the appropriate wordlist, of
>>>> course.
>>>
>>> Still begs the question if resurrecting the EDITOR vocabulary for these
>>> few words might be useful.
>>
>> It could be done in a heartbeat if anyone complained of problems with
>> these words. AFAIK no one has.
>>
>>> Actually, the Gforth LOCATE browser does read
>>> in the file in a way that is usable for a PolyForth-style editor, and
>>> adding such a simple editor would be just a few dozen lines.  Or adding a
>>> full-screen editor maybe would be a line or two more (don't know how
>>> many ;-).  I would use the command line editor to edit the individual
>>> lines, which then would give features like tab completion "for free".
>>
>> The basic polyFORTH editor was 16 lines, with a second block added to
>> provide a "screen editor". It was discarded because most of our users
>> preferred programmers' editors that they used in other projects, so it
>> hardly seemed worthwhile to modify it to work in files rather than blocks.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Elizabeth
>>
>I could see where a block editor might be handy even as a general
>purpose editor, specially in embedded systems where the CPUs keep having
>more and more memory, some up to 2 Megabytes, plenty for programs and
>locally edit some files with a simple editor which might be faster than
>downloading the whole source from a PC.

I implemented a screen editor for MSDOS. This provides easy experimenting
with new facilities in the screens. It works directly on the video buffer.
Apart from the Wordstar move by char, move by word, it stacks deleted
lines and words, and they are visible on the bottom of the screen,
where they can be undeleted. With slightly over a dozen single character
control commands, it is by far the most practical screen editor I've
ever seen. E.g. to duplicate a line
^Y    delete a line appears at the bottom
^U    insert it
^U    insert it again

This is also useful for a booting Forth, switching back to real mode
to access the video buffer, and accessing the large memory of the
machine in 32 bits protected mode.

In a situation where you use a pc as a terminal to connect to a sbc,
it doesn't make sense to try have a screen editor on the sbc.
It is easier to transport a screen to the pc, use a screen editor there,
and transport it back. Almost everybody will save it to a small file,
edit that, and check whether it fits while uploading.
Or do it the Commodore 64/ BASIC way. Fool around on the PC screen,
insert and delete chars here and there. Then mark an area with the
mouse and press a special key to transfer it back to the sbc.

As there is just one block-file for all ciforth versions
the MSDOS editor can be found in forth.lab for lina32/lina64.
It can be made to work on Linux by using TERMCAP or infocmp,
with the same front end of the editor, any takers?

>--
>Cecil - k5nwa

Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

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

#51565

On Monday, October 3, 2016 at 11:48:56 PM UTC+13, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> As there is just one block-file for all ciforth versions
> the MSDOS editor can be found in forth.lab for lina32/lina64.
> It can be made to work on Linux by using TERMCAP or infocmp,
> with the same front end of the editor, any takers?

Probably more fruitful to reimplement it as extension macros for Emacs.

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

#51598

Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> writes:
>Am Sat, 01 Oct 2016 15:31:03 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:
>
>> On 10/1/16 2:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>> However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor
>>> vocabulary, and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor
>>> vocabulary when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words like
>>> I (insert) did not collide with normal Forth words.
>>>
>>> In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.
>> 
>> True. SwiftForth doesn't have an internal editor, because it can
>> interface well to external editors. Incidentally, there were 3 versions
>> of I in earlier FORTH, Inc. products: the loop version, the editor
>> version (Insert), and the assembler version (the register or location
>> used for the Interpreter pointer), each in the appropriate wordlist, of
>> course.
>
>Still begs the question if resurrecting the EDITOR vocabulary for these 
>few words might be useful.

B and N don't collide with other words, and for numbers the way to go
is to write $B or 0B, so I don't see a point in putting them into the
EDITOR vocabulary.  I would just burden the users with either always
having the EDITOR vocabulary in the search order, or with typing
PREVIOUS once for every L.

>Actually, the Gforth LOCATE browser does read 
>in the file in a way that is usable for a PolyForth-style editor, and 
>adding such a simple editor would be just a few dozen lines.  Or adding a 
>full-screen editor maybe would be a line or two more (don't know how 
>many ;-).  I would use the command line editor to edit the individual 
>lines, which then would give features like tab completion "for free".

What would be the point of such an editor, other than to prove that
you can do it?  Nobody would use it.  Even Forth, Inc., has not
supplied such an editor for files, because everybody prefers their
favourite file editor.

- 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]

#51617

Am Tue, 04 Oct 2016 09:18:15 +0000 schrieb Anton Ertl:
>>Actually, the Gforth LOCATE browser does read in the file in a way that
>>is usable for a PolyForth-style editor, and adding such a simple editor
>>would be just a few dozen lines.  Or adding a full-screen editor maybe
>>would be a line or two more (don't know how many ;-).  I would use the
>>command line editor to edit the individual lines, which then would give
>>features like tab completion "for free".
> 
> What would be the point of such an editor, other than to prove that you
> can do it?  Nobody would use it.  Even Forth, Inc., has not supplied
> such an editor for files, because everybody prefers their favourite file
> editor.

The Android users have already asked for a built-in editor... because 
they don't have a "favorite file editor" on their OS.  The available 
editors as part of file managers are very limited.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
http://bernd-paysan.de/

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

#52045

     It's not true that Gforth Android users don't have a favorite editor.  We just can't interface with them without using the Android "Intent" system:)
     Also, writing a Gforth "internal" editor--I won't say "native"--is a rather trivial project.  Most of the code is already 
written into Gforth "version#" files, especially history.fs.

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

#52095

Am Wed, 19 Oct 2016 06:47:03 -0700 schrieb jjmail9:

> It's not true that Gforth Android users don't have a favorite editor. 

I don't. None of the editors I have installed on my Android is anything 
close to "favorite".  I may have a "least hated editor" on Android. Maybe 
I didn't look long enough ;-).

> We just can't interface with them without using the Android "Intent"
> system:)

But we for sure can use the Android "Intent" system using JNI, can't we? 
Just nobody so far has done it... The code in Java is pretty simple:

Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_EDIT); 
Uri uri = Uri.parse("file:///sdcard/folder/file.txt"); 
intent.setDataAndType(uri, "text/plain"); 
startActivity(intent);

One essential problem here for good integration is that you can't tell 
the intent, where in the file it should start editing...

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
http://bernd-paysan.de/

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

#51618

On 10/3/16 11:18 PM, Anton Ertl wrote:
> Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> writes:
>> Am Sat, 01 Oct 2016 15:31:03 -1000 schrieb Elizabeth D. Rather:
>>
>>> On 10/1/16 2:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>>> However, IIRC, the editor commands lived in a special editor
>>>> vocabulary, and only L was visible by default, switching to the editor
>>>> vocabulary when used.  That way, all those one-letter editor words like
>>>> I (insert) did not collide with normal Forth words.
>>>>
>>>> In SwiftForth, B and N are globally visible, though.
>>>
>>> True. SwiftForth doesn't have an internal editor, because it can
>>> interface well to external editors. Incidentally, there were 3 versions
>>> of I in earlier FORTH, Inc. products: the loop version, the editor
>>> version (Insert), and the assembler version (the register or location
>>> used for the Interpreter pointer), each in the appropriate wordlist, of
>>> course.
>>
>> Still begs the question if resurrecting the EDITOR vocabulary for these
>> few words might be useful.
>
> B and N don't collide with other words, and for numbers the way to go
> is to write $B or 0B, so I don't see a point in putting them into the
> EDITOR vocabulary.  I would just burden the users with either always
> having the EDITOR vocabulary in the search order, or with typing
> PREVIOUS once for every L.

If EDITOR is always in the search order, what's the point in having it? 
It was necessary in polyFORTH and its predecessors because of the "three 
I's" described above.

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]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

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

csiph-web