Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #47094 > unrolled thread
| Started by | stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-13 20:05 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-05-17 21:08 +1000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 214 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
C to Forth (was Ting) stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-05-13 20:05 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-13 14:06 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-05-14 00:27 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-13 21:55 -0700
RTX20xx ...Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2016-05-19 08:58 +0100
Re: RTX20xx ...Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-05-21 04:08 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-05-21 04:09 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-13 14:33 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-05-14 00:28 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-13 21:02 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-14 15:15 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-05-14 17:39 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-14 16:56 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-05-14 20:25 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 00:16 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-15 00:19 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 08:58 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-15 08:24 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 17:18 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-15 18:52 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-05-16 06:23 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-16 15:12 -0700
Programmable "people" "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-20 23:34 +0000
Re: Programmable "people" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 00:48 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-23 14:21 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-05-15 10:42 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-05-17 20:33 +1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-17 08:39 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-05-17 14:06 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-17 11:40 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-17 19:20 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Tessa Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 08:32 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-15 12:18 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-05-25 13:41 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-15 17:22 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-15 17:24 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-15 19:30 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-05-16 13:37 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-16 07:25 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-05-16 21:50 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-16 16:06 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 01:04 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-17 01:43 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-05-17 10:05 +0100
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-17 11:08 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-18 10:49 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-05-19 13:27 +0100
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 06:01 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-19 10:32 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-19 10:11 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 16:29 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-19 14:16 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-19 14:07 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-19 14:42 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-20 03:46 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-05-20 04:53 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-20 22:16 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 21:43 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-21 15:56 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-21 02:52 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 22:11 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-21 03:13 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-21 15:43 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-22 22:22 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2016-05-23 08:30 +0200
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-22 23:39 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-22 23:36 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-23 04:24 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-24 09:14 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-05-23 10:35 +0100
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-23 18:53 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-23 19:43 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-24 00:28 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-23 21:53 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-24 01:56 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-24 09:03 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-24 22:09 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-23 22:59 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-24 04:32 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-24 12:46 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-24 15:26 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-24 15:57 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2016-05-25 07:44 +0200
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-24 23:29 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-24 22:09 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-25 03:57 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-05-24 11:04 +0100
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-05-24 14:01 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 15:05 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-19 21:25 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-20 03:57 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 06:48 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-20 09:40 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-20 09:31 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 13:53 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 14:16 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-21 03:01 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-21 10:23 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 13:37 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-23 04:38 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-23 23:11 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-05-24 13:15 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-24 13:51 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 19:36 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 22:50 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-21 16:22 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 14:04 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-22 15:33 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 19:14 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-22 17:11 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 20:58 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-23 13:50 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 08:09 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-23 13:38 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 07:58 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 18:55 +0300
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 16:00 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 06:54 +0300
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 00:04 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 07:19 +0300
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 00:40 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 08:04 +0300
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 03:41 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-24 01:51 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Bruce Axtens <bruce.axtens@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 10:00 +0800
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 07:08 +0300
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-24 04:36 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 02:48 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-05-23 19:28 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-23 11:46 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 13:30 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-05-24 13:37 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 14:22 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-05-26 00:29 +0200
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 16:12 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 23:29 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:06 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-25 19:30 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-25 20:52 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 23:27 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 07:40 +0300
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-26 10:03 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:31 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-27 07:22 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 06:07 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-27 10:00 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 15:51 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-27 16:27 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-27 19:25 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-28 13:12 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 15:07 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-28 19:15 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 23:41 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 14:50 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-29 04:36 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-29 04:34 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-29 12:19 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 15:37 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-30 15:31 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 14:54 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-30 14:44 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-30 19:21 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 13:49 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-31 04:01 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 15:02 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-31 17:27 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-06-01 07:22 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 16:09 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-06-01 18:03 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 06:36 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-06-01 02:54 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 08:50 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-06-01 07:38 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 10:58 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-06-01 11:32 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 17:10 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 17:04 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-06-01 17:57 -1000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-06-01 22:54 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 04:31 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-06-02 04:59 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 11:44 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 14:58 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 23:43 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 15:07 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 22:44 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 07:14 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 10:33 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) pahihu <pahihu@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 10:31 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 16:57 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) pahihu <pahihu@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 23:57 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 09:01 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) pahihu <pahihu@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 07:17 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 13:12 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 14:09 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 10:07 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 17:13 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 02:14 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-17 11:50 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-17 15:28 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-17 18:52 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-18 09:41 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-17 01:12 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-05-17 04:34 -0500
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-17 10:46 -0700
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-18 09:10 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-18 09:36 -0400
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-16 17:58 +0000
Cross compilers [Was: C to Forth] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-18 04:58 -0500
Re: Cross compilers [Was: C to Forth] Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-18 11:25 +0000
Re: Cross compilers [Was: C to Forth] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-05-18 10:28 -0500
Recognizers (was: Cross compilers) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-05-18 16:48 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-16 15:11 +0000
Re: C to Forth (was Ting) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-05-17 21:08 +1000
Page 2 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 11 Next page →
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-16 06:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2016May16.082304@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #47156 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>On 5/15/16 2:58 AM, rickman wrote:
>> At risk of setting him off on another rant, I will point out that Hugh
>> was once part of the Forth standards process, but he was unable to
>> refrain from his rantings long enough to do any useful work and ended up
>> in such conflict with nearly everyone else on the committee that he
>> could not remain.
>
>When and in what capacity was Hugh ever involved in the Forth standards
>process? He is not listed in any of the contributors either to Forth94
>(ANS Forth) or Forth 2012.
He made an RfD
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/forth200x/conversations/topics/448>.
This was discussed quite a bit, but then it turned out that most Forth
systems implement ALLOCATE etc. based on C's malloc() etc., and any
variant of SIZE would therefore be expensive to implement on most
Forth systems, or require that we use carnal knowledge of the
malloc()'s implementation; the latter is particularly problematic for
the significant number of systems that run on multiple platforms.
That pretty much doomed that proposal, and Hugh Aguilar did not take
that gracefully.
From that point on, his participation on the mailing list was not
constructive, and at some point, his behaviour became so abusive that
several people unsubscribed, so we removed him from the mailing list
(he actually had asked for that in one of his postings, so one can say
we followed his wishes).
- 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 | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-16 15:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0dcb0374-b345-4dec-b63e-0746c50dd46e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47183 |
On Sunday, May 15, 2016 at 11:37:37 PM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote: > "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: > >On 5/15/16 2:58 AM, rickman wrote: > >> At risk of setting him off on another rant, I will point out that Hugh > >> was once part of the Forth standards process, but he was unable to > >> refrain from his rantings long enough to do any useful work and ended up > >> in such conflict with nearly everyone else on the committee that he > >> could not remain. > > > >When and in what capacity was Hugh ever involved in the Forth standards > >process? He is not listed in any of the contributors either to Forth94 > >(ANS Forth) or Forth 2012. > > He made an RfD > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/forth200x/conversations/topics/448>. > This was discussed quite a bit, but then it turned out that most Forth > systems implement ALLOCATE etc. based on C's malloc() etc., and any > variant of SIZE would therefore be expensive to implement on most > Forth systems, or require that we use carnal knowledge of the > malloc()'s implementation; the latter is particularly problematic for > the significant number of systems that run on multiple platforms. > That pretty much doomed that proposal, and Hugh Aguilar did not take > that gracefully. > > From that point on, his participation on the mailing list was not > constructive, and at some point, his behaviour became so abusive that > several people unsubscribed, so we removed him from the mailing list > (he actually had asked for that in one of his postings, so one can say > we followed his wishes). > > - anton It is pathetic that you are so dependent upon GCC that you can't allow Forth-200x to have any feature, such as ALLOCATION, that isn't already provided by GCC. The standard is supposed to standardize behavior not implementation, but you are standardizing a GCC implementation. Most likely, you don't actually know assembly-language --- that is just pathetic! --- I think that Elizabeth Rather appointed you to be the chair-person of the Forth-200x committee because you agreed to make gForth generate slower code than SwiftForth so as to not undermine SwiftForth sales (I found gForth code to be about half the speed of SwiftForth, which is pretty pathetic considering that SwiftForth does almost no optimization and the code is too slow for commercial use). At the same time, Elizabeth Rather began telling a lot of lies about my novice package. Specifically, she said this: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Does "*every* application" you write use exactly the same kind of data arranged in the same way? If so, having written it once you can reuse it often. If not, you either have to rearrange your data to make it work or modify your "general-purpose" structure. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I was seriously offended by this statement. I put a lot of work into implementing general-purpose data-structures in the novice-package, and she is just straight-out lying about how they work. She is trying to drag myself, and the entire Forth community, down to her own level of incompetence. And why is she so opposed to general-purpose data-structures? Supposedly, Charles Moore was opposed to general-purpose code, and there are some quotes from Charles Moore indicating this --- I doubt that Charles Moore is actually so opposed to general-purpose code though, or he would be here on c.l.f. saying so himself --- more likely is that his thoughts on the subject are more nuanced than people believe, and that saying he is totally opposed to general-purpose code is just Elizabeth Rather's simple-minded interpretation. Now she claims to have never heard of my involvement in Forth-200x. At the time however, she was demanding that I be kicked out. This is what she said: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hugh has been hanging around c.l.f for several years, now. He originally got mad at FORTH, Inc. because we insisted on charging for an upgrade to SwiftForth 3.0 for people who had bought 2.x > a year earlier. He has had one programming job, paying $10/hr, on which he wrote a cross-compiler for a microcontroller for a project. He was fired at the end of the project, and has since been working as a taxicab driver. He is actively homophobic, and developed his hatred for me when I called him on a particularly vitriolic attack on a c.l.f poster who dared to mention his partner. Pretty much everyone on c.l.f has his number. Hope you are doing well. Ned and i are enjoying life in Hawaii, and hope you are, too! Aloha, Elizabeth ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- She is totally lying! I wasn't fired from Testra (where I wrote MFX for the MiniForth processor). Her lie isn't even realistic --- how would she know anything about Testra business? --- nobody at Testra can stand her either, and they aren't talking to her. After I left Testra after finishing MFX, I worked worked as an IBM370 assembly-language programmer for about 18 months, and after that company went out of business I went back to Testra and did another project for them. And, BTW, how is that Hawaii thing working out for you, Elizabeth? There was an assassination attempt made against you in the parking lot of the condo where you lived. After this you had to leave Hawaii. That assassination attempt was bad publicity for Hawaii because Hawaii represents itself as being crime-free, so you were told to leave Hawaii because the police didn't want to protect you from future assassination attempts. Aloha! (means both "hello" and "goodbye," and in your case it meant: "goodbye and don't come back!"). Just prior to the assassination attempt you were on comp.lang.forth bragging about how Forth Inc. was suing Apple Computer for using the name "Swift" for their new programming language (Swift is Apple's answer to Google's Go; it has most of the same features as Go). So, how is that lawsuit working out for you? After the assassination attempt against you, you stopped bragging about the lawsuit and apparently dropped it. It seems likely to me that Apple Computer paid for the assassination (they can have this done for $10,000, and they would pay a lot more than that in legal fees to stop your frivolous lawsuit, so it is less expensive for them to just kill you rather than go to court). Of course, Forth Inc. scams all of its customers, so Apple Computer isn't the only company around that might want you dead --- you have left a long trail of victims, so there is no way to even begin to figure out who tried to kill you --- as far as the police in Hawaii were concerned, however, just telling you to leave was the best way to solve the problem. Anton says that I did ask to get kicked out of Forth-200x, and this is true: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Elizabeth says: "Hope you are doing well. Ned and i are enjoying life in Hawaii, and hope you are, too!" I don't live in Hawaii, so kick me off the Forth-200x mailing list! Ultimately, one or the other of us have to get kicked out --- we can't both be part of Forth-200x --- it is up to Anton to decide which one of will get kicked off, and I had expected him to make his decision already. It seems like a pretty easy decision, so I don't know why he is delaying. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Elizabeth Rather has a long history of lying about people who refuse to brown-nose her. Jeff Fox, in private communication, said this: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- For many years Rather posted tons of garbage about Chuck and would argue with me about simple facts over and over, always claiming to have forgotten the facts every couple of years. She never heard of Chuck after he left Forth Inc. She never heard about things like cmForth and continued to make claims that she never heard of optimzing native code Forth compilers that were published a decade before ANS. She preferred to pretend to be ingnorant and have a bad memory. For years I did not think that there was any way to prevent Elizabeth from posting garbage about Chuck and his work. All I could do was correct her year after year and put up the abuse. It almost seemed like she was trying to blackmail Chuck. Then IntellaSys paid her some obscene amount of money to write a little (poorly written) documenation on SEAforth. Then she had no excuse to claim complete ignorance. That's when I realized that it had been blackmail. The way to get her to stop posting lies was simply to pay her off. Once IntellaSys quit paying her she began posting garbage again. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email was sent to me on 5/3/2011 and Jeff Fox died on 5/4/2011, so calling Elizabeth Rather a liar was the last thing he did in life. John Passaniti, the flaming homosexual, used to torment Jeff Fox continually on comp.lang.forth. He would endlessly tell lies about Jeff Fox and Charles Moore, and when Jeff Fox would tell the truth Passaniti would purposely misunderstand what he said and twist his words to mean something completely untrue. Of course, Elizabeth Rather and Bernd Paysan would praise Passaniti continually, and they would pretend that Passaniti was a great Forth programmer despite the fact that Passaniti had never posted any Forth code on c.l.f. (all the code that Passaniti posted on c.l.f. was in Perl, and it seemed that Perl was the only language he knew; his claim to fame regarding Forth was to have once written a Forth-like interpreter in Perl). After Jeff Fox died, Passaniti just disappeared. How strange, that he was supposedly a great Forth programmer, and he was so dedicated to c.l.f. that he posted messages here every day, and yet he completely lost interest in the subject and disappeared. Most likely, Elizabeth Rather was paying him to torment Jeff Fox --- after Jeff Fox died there was no further need for him, so she stopped paying him --- he left because he wasn't getting paid anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-20 23:34 +0000 |
| Subject | Programmable "people" |
| Message-ID | <nho6te$256$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47222 |
> > He is actively homophobic, Fifty years ago almost everybody believed that homosexuality was abnormal. What is it that has caused so many creatures today to believe that homosexuality is normal and that aversion to homosexuality is abnormal? Scientific research? A revelation from God? No. Their minds were changed by brainwashing by the Jewish-controlled media, in which homosexuals are always portrayed as noble, kind, sensitive, and intelligent, and those who are disgusted by the perverts are shown to be vicious and contemptible. They have been programmed to call queers "gays" and to call normal humans "homophobes". Promotion of homosexuality and other forms of depravity is being used by the Cultural Marxists to further their agenda of destruction. Here's advice for those who can think. Don't believe the Jew-media; disbelieve the Jew-media. Don't obey the Jew-media; disobey the Jew-media. -- Jews totally run Hollywood.... But I don't care if Americans think we're running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them. --- Joel Stein archive.org/download/DavidDukeTv/DoJewsControlTheMediaTheLaTimesSaysYes.flv articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/19/opinion/oe-stein19
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-21 00:48 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Programmable "people" |
| Message-ID | <nhop43$ei1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47371 |
On 5/20/2016 7:34 PM, WJ wrote: <<< a bunch of anti-Semitic stuff that was snipped >>> One loon replying to another. This group just keeps getting better and better. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 14:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhv3lc$cok$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47137 |
hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > For a good laugh, read section 3.4.4.: > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > When an ambiguous condition exists, a system may take one or more of the > following actions: > - ignore and continue; > - display a message; > - execute a particular word; > - set interpretation state and begin text interpretation; > - take other implementation-defined actions; > - take implementation-dependent actions. > The response to a particular ambiguous condition need not be the same under > all circumstances. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > So, pretty much anything can happen, including reformatting your hard-disk. Wow. Almost unbelievably bad. -- Jewish drug dealers, child porn pushers, and slave traders are free from prosecution in Israel. Israel does not consider these to be crimes ... so long as the victims are non-Jews. www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2009/08/the-culture-of-deceit/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 10:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2016May15.124204@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #47134 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>Nearly all of the issues Hugh complains about only exist in Hugh's head.
> His idea of a truly worthy Forth is only the one that he writes.
Does he write one? Or is it the Forth that he claims he will be
writing?
- 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 | "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 20:33 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nhes0p$1c4k$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #47134 |
rickman wrote: > ... > Nearly all of the issues Hugh complains about only exist in Hugh's head. > His idea of a truly worthy Forth is only the one that he writes. If ANS was so great, what need was there for 200x? Not defending Hugh - just saying he's not unique when it comes to complaining about Forth. Forth's real problem is that 'users' would rather write hundreds of posts about it on c.l.f. - than actually use it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 08:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ZvmdnTaj6-SygqbKnZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #47246 |
HAA <someone@microsoft.com> wrote: > rickman wrote: >> ... >> Nearly all of the issues Hugh complains about only exist in Hugh's head. >> His idea of a truly worthy Forth is only the one that he writes. > > If ANS was so great, what need was there for 200x? Time passes; requirements change. > Not defending Hugh - just saying he's not unique when it comes to > complaining about Forth. Forth's real problem is that 'users' would > rather write hundreds of posts about it on c.l.f. - than actually > use it. In which case the "real problem" is concentrated here. Most people who actually use Forth to do work aren't here, as the professional vendors will tell you. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 14:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2016May17.160604@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #47246 |
"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> writes:
>If ANS was so great, what need was there for 200x?
There is only so much a standard can do at a time. Time moves on,
Forth systems get additional features, Forth programs use additional
features, and there is additional common practice. Some of that was
documented in Forth-2012. But for the same reason we are continuing.
- 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 | 2016-05-17 11:40 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <cuadnVOuM5ZaEqbKnZ2dnUU7-LHNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #47252 |
On 5/17/16 4:06 AM, Anton Ertl wrote: > "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> writes: >> If ANS was so great, what need was there for 200x? > > There is only so much a standard can do at a time. Time moves on, > Forth systems get additional features, Forth programs use additional > features, and there is additional common practice. Some of that was > documented in Forth-2012. But for the same reason we are continuing. All true. In recognition of this fact, all major standards organizations (ANSI, IEEE, ISO, etc.) *require* standards to be updated every 5 years. If a standard is not updated, it loses official recognition. 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 | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-17 19:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <32087ec3-bb3a-465f-950b-23a195276e37@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47246 |
On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 3:33:02 AM UTC-7, HAA wrote: > If ANS was so great, what need was there for 200x? Forth-200x is mandated to be 100% compatible with ANS-Forth. It is just more bloat on top, but the core is still the same --- the core is rotten. The "need" for Forth-200x was just to give credibility to ANS-Forth that it didn't deserve --- make it appear that ANS-Forth is the Standard that everybody relies on --- ignore the fact that all the compilers that claim to be ANS-Forth compliant are actually incompatible with each other, and all the ANS-Forth programmers are just writing vendor-specific code as if there were no standard. As Stephen Pelc says: "RTFM!" As Elizabeth Rather says: "Just declare a dependency and forge ahead!" (these are both true quotes) Time hasn't really moved on all that much. I knew what was needed for a cross-compiler in 1994, and this is still the same in 2016, and will continue to be the same forever. Ambiguity was utter corruption to the concept of a standard in 1994, and this is still true in 2016, and will continue to be true forever. Sales-people were idiots in 1994...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tessa Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 08:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f03df5c1-a028-45b3-9a18-ae5d5774acd6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47126 |
Op zondag 15 mei 2016 00:15:14 UTC+2 schreef hughag...@gmail.com: > On Saturday, May 14, 2016 at 12:02:50 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > On 5/13/16 6:28 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > > On Fri, 13 May 2016 14:33:51 -0700 (PDT) > > > hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > ... > > >> ANS-Forth is just a collection of brown-nosers who want to be big > > >> internet experts on Forth without ever writing any Forth code > > > > > > I won't argue with you on that one. That might true, in general. > > > > I can only speak authoritatively for the Forth94 committee, but it > > included some of the finest and most experienced Forth programmers > > around at the time. Take a look at the list of contributing members in > > the free published draft. I don't know all of the members of Forth 20xx, > > but the ones I do know have outstanding programming backgrounds. > > > > Cheers, > > Elizabeth > > You list Ray Duncan as a contributing member. In 1993, one year before ANS-Forth came out, he was describing aspects of ANS-Forth as "brain damaged" on c.l.f.. When ANS-Forth came out he gave up on Forth altogether. > > You also list Charles Moore as a contributing member. He doesn't support you either. In all likelihood, none of the people that you list as supporters actually support you. You just make this stuff up! > > I wrote MFX in 1994/1995 using UR/Forth (from Ray Duncan's LMI). Realistically, this would not have been possible in ANS-Forth --- ANS-Forth was crippled to make cross-compilation difficult. In UR/Forth I was able to take an xt an determine whether it was immediate or not, and which vocabulary it was defined in --- this was needed for error-checking --- you disallowed this in ANS-Forth. Hugh are you realy unable to write a cross-compiler in ANS-Forth? Mayby you are not so smart as you would like to show. Anybody, that is at grade C in ANS-Forth can write a cross-compiler and you say that you are a professial writer of Forth. > > If the ANS-Forth committee included the "finest and most experienced Forth programmers around at the time," then why were they unable to write a compiler for ANS-Forth? You pushed ANS-Forth through ANSI without any compiler having ever been written for it. You were in a hurry to get the ANSI stamp because doing so makes you the "leading expert" on Forth and puts you in a position to denounce everybody else (me, for example) as being non-standard. ANS-Forth was just a marketing gimmick from Forth Inc. to make Forth Inc. appear more important than they are. You didn't have a compiler for ANS-Forth --- ANS-Forth became the standard without being tested --- if ANS-Forth had been tested, people would have noticed the myriad bugs and ambiguities. Have you ever even try'd to write an ANS-Forth? I think you can't, your not even read the standard properly, so writing a reference Forth is not at your level. > > ANS-Forth is a cult --- ANS-Forth has no practical value whatsoever. I have been using your "novice" forth and there is no documentation for the real novice, things do not work or do what is not expected and then its al 64 bit while it dos not work properly under the most basic 64 bit processor at all. Go drive your cap and stop programming, hopefully you can drive a car better then your most basic programming in Forth or any other languages. Live the Forth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 12:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6bc36349-14d8-4334-9d47-c5051163167d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47148 |
On Sunday, May 15, 2016 at 8:32:48 AM UTC-7, Tessa Bonting wrote: > Op zondag 15 mei 2016 00:15:14 UTC+2 schreef hughag...@gmail.com: > > I wrote MFX in 1994/1995 using UR/Forth (from Ray Duncan's LMI). Realistically, this would not have been possible in ANS-Forth --- ANS-Forth was crippled to make cross-compilation difficult. In UR/Forth I was able to take an xt an determine whether it was immediate or not, and which vocabulary it was defined in --- this was needed for error-checking --- you disallowed this in ANS-Forth. > > Hugh are you realy unable to write a cross-compiler in ANS-Forth? > Mayby you are not so smart as you would like to show. > Anybody, that is at grade C in ANS-Forth can write a cross-compiler > and you say that you are a professial writer of Forth. > > Have you ever even try'd to write an ANS-Forth? I think you can't, > your not even read the standard properly, so writing a reference > Forth is not at your level. There are two ways to write a cross-compiler. 1.) Use the built-in outer-interpreter. If you do this in ANS-Forth however, then you can't have literal numbers. : test 10 + ; \ this fails because the 10 compiles into the host system rather than the target system You have to use a work-around such as this: : test [ 10 ] literal + ; \ this works because the cross-compiler's LITERAL is being used So, yes it is possible to write a cross-compiler in ANS-Forth, but you can't have literal numbers, so your Forth code isn't fully Forth. 2.) Write your own outer-interpreter. If you do this however, the problem with FIND and tick aborting on most of the words in the ANS-Forth standard will cause your outer-interpreter to fail. Once again (section 4.1.2) lists one of the ambiguous conditions as: "attempting to obtain the execution token, (e.g., with 6.1.0070 ', 6.1.1550 FIND, etc.) of a definition with undefined interpretation semantics;" My disambiguifiers solve this problem. Now that I have figured out how to disambiguify FIND I can write a cross-compiler under ANS-Forth. Before I had my disambiguifiers, I believed that it was impossible to write a cross-compiler under ANS-Forth (except by using the #1 technique described above that lacks literal numbers). I think that the reason why Stephen Pelc refuses to accept my disambiguifiers is because he wants to prevent the common ANS-Forth programmers from writing their own outer-interpreter, which is required for the #2 technique for writing a cross-compiler. He wants to force any cross-compiler writer to use the #1 technique and hence to not be able to support literal numbers. He is purposely trying to make cross-compilation difficult in ANS-Forth difficult to prevent people from writing cross-compilers in competition with MPE (MPE makes most of its money selling cross-compilers). > > ANS-Forth is a cult --- ANS-Forth has no practical value whatsoever. > > I have been using your "novice" forth and there is no documentation > for the real novice, things do not work or do what is not expected > and then its al 64 bit while it dos not work properly under the > most basic 64 bit processor at all. > Go drive your cap and stop programming, hopefully you can drive > a car better then your most basic programming in Forth or any other > languages. There are no bugs in the novice package. Also, there is plenty of documentation --- heavily commented code, plus text files describing how it works. You are a liar. This is typical cult behavior --- the hallmark of a cult is that the members routinely tell big lies to support their leader. I notice that your grammar and spelling is terrible --- most likely you were drunk when you wrote your post --- you were just making up a lot of lies. As for 64-bit, the novice-package should work on any cell size. The only code that is specific to 32-bit is LC53 and JRND (they won't work on 16-bit because they'll overflow). I've not tested the novice-package on a 16-bit or 64-bit ANS-Forth however, because I'm not aware of any being in existence. > Live the Forth. Being a Forth programmer, to me, involves writing Forth code. There is no need to join a cult! In as long as comp.lang.forth has existed, all the Forth code that Elizabeth Rather has posted has been copied directly out of the "Starting Forth" book. She is not a programmer! She is a fake! ANS-Forth is a cult --- Elizabeth Rather has surrounded herself with sycophants such as yourself who support her claim to be the "leading expert" on Forth, who support ANS-Forth religiously --- all ANS-Forth "programmers" are liars, like you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | foxaudioresearch@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-25 13:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <de90ebdb-daab-451b-b881-729f706d0484@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47158 |
On Sunday, May 15, 2016 at 3:18:35 PM UTC-4, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, May 15, 2016 at 8:32:48 AM UTC-7, Tessa Bonting wrote: > > Op zondag 15 mei 2016 00:15:14 UTC+2 schreef hughag...@gmail.com: > > > I wrote MFX in 1994/1995 using UR/Forth (from Ray Duncan's LMI). Realistically, this would not have been possible in ANS-Forth --- ANS-Forth was crippled to make cross-compilation difficult. In UR/Forth I was able to take an xt an determine whether it was immediate or not, and which vocabulary it was defined in --- this was needed for error-checking --- you disallowed this in ANS-Forth. > > > > Hugh are you realy unable to write a cross-compiler in ANS-Forth? > > Mayby you are not so smart as you would like to show. > > Anybody, that is at grade C in ANS-Forth can write a cross-compiler > > and you say that you are a professial writer of Forth. > > > > Have you ever even try'd to write an ANS-Forth? I think you can't, > > your not even read the standard properly, so writing a reference > > Forth is not at your level. > > There are two ways to write a cross-compiler. > > 1.) Use the built-in outer-interpreter. If you do this in ANS-Forth however, then you can't have literal numbers. > > : test 10 + ; \ this fails because the 10 compiles into the host system rather than the target system > > You have to use a work-around such as this: > > : test [ 10 ] literal + ; \ this works because the cross-compiler's LITERAL is being used > <snip> I am no expert on what is or is not ANS/ISO Forth but I wrote a new version of find, ' etc that searches the target memory only. The Target Forth uses CAMEL Forth headers and so is completely in-compatible with HsForth segmented model (headers in another segment). I also wrote words like Tliteral that do literals to the Target Forth only. And then using those new "Target" words wrote the cross-compiler loop and the rest. I tend to ignore where I cross the line into "forbidden territory" because it's Forth for Pete's sake. For me ANS Forth makes it thinkable to port Forth code to another system, but not painless. I would never expect that from a low level language. When I started with HS/Forth there was barely anything beyond @ and ! that was the same as other systems. Converting it to work more like an ANS system means I have actually downloaded some simple code and it runs! What difference that is from the old days. BF
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 17:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nhap4c$3de$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47148 |
On 5/15/2016 11:32 AM, Tessa Bonting wrote: > > I have been using your "novice" forth and there is no documentation > for the real novice, things do not work or do what is not expected > and then its al 64 bit while it dos not work properly under the > most basic 64 bit processor at all. > Go drive your cap and stop programming, hopefully you can drive > a car better then your most basic programming in Forth or any other > languages. > > Live the Forth. I read Hugh's response to your post. Lol. He has you labeled now and forever. He is right about one thing. Your typos muddle the message. What are you saying about 64 bit? -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 17:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87wpmuonmz.fsf@jester.gateway.pace.com> |
| In reply to | #47148 |
Tessa Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> writes: > Anybody, that is at grade C in ANS-Forth can write a cross-compiler > and you say that you are a professial writer of Forth. I'm probably below grade C but I don't quite see how to write a cross-compiler in pure ANS. There was an extension proposal that seems to be offline now: http://www.forth.com/downloads/ANS/XCpaper.pdf I didn't check Wayback so it might be there. I think I have an offline copy someplace.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-15 19:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <83be70a5-3db4-4b66-87c7-300b93ce5dab@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47170 |
On Sunday, May 15, 2016 at 5:24:59 PM UTC-7, Paul Rubin wrote: > Tessa Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> writes: > > Anybody, that is at grade C in ANS-Forth can write a cross-compiler > > and you say that you are a professial writer of Forth. > > I'm probably below grade C but I don't quite see how to write a > cross-compiler in pure ANS. There was an extension proposal that seems > to be offline now: > > http://www.forth.com/downloads/ANS/XCpaper.pdf > > I didn't check Wayback so it might be there. I think I have an offline > copy someplace. My experience is that everybody says cross-compilation in Forth is "easy" or "well-established," etc.. As soon as the person begins to describe it however, it becomes obvious that the person doesn't know how it works. In private correspondence, Jeff Fox said this: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- You are right that a target compiler can be simpler than when one has to include an interpreter and a compiler inside an application. There are times when one does want an interpreter and/or a compiler in an application but not always. It is also true that the proposed ANS target compiler standard is way overly complicated. Have you seen it? It doesn't sound like that is your style. I am about to post two new pages, One is Factoring and one is Smarter than a First Grader? I expect that many people will think that I am overstating my opinions. Like many of the essays and tutorials I have posted they are both related to people asking the same dumb questions and saying the same dumb things in c.l.f but never learning the answers or why some things are dumb. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- He may have been referring to the same document that you are referring to (I have not read it; I have never actually read anything about Forth cross-compilation whether ANS-Forth or otherwise). As to those pages that he intended to post, I don't think he ever did. This email was dated 4/27/2011 and he died 5/4/2011. On the subject of people making statements about Forth cross-compilation that indicate that they don't know what they are talking about, this thread contains some doozies: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.lang.forth/lc53/comp.lang.forth/wP5nw1ClzsM/E-TV9v2y9RoJ I recommend that everybody read this thread --- there is a lot of good stuff in there! On Friday, December 4, 2009 at 1:19:24 PM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote: > Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> writes: > >What's this about? Are host/Ttarget systems covered by ANS Forth? > > No. Cross compilers are not supported by Forth-94, nor in the current > draft of Forth200x. There is a cross-compiler proposal, and there are > people working on getting it ready for Forth 200x (or 201x). > > - anton According to Tessa Bonting, writing a cross-compiler in ANS-Forth is something that a C-student can accomplish, but yet nobody knew how to do it in 2009 --- apparently the Forth-200x committee were all D students! On Tuesday, December 8, 2009 at 3:18:13 PM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote: > On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 14:32:02 -0500, Jonah Thomas <jethomas5@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >Suppose you extended the cross-compiler so that the TARGET could be the > >HOST . Then you'd have a clear distinction between COMPILER words and > >regular words, but the distinction between HOST and TARGET would have > >disappeared. > > There are three types of compilation involved > 1) Host compilation > 2) Clone compilation (target CPU same as host and memory matches) > 3) Cross compilation (target CPU is not host CPU) > > In the third case you have to simulate *everything* when dealing > with both the definition and execution of defining words. It's not > easy. You also have to extend the normal Forth compiler by at least > two time frames. Forth cross compilers are much more complicated > and much more subtle than they appear to be. > > That's one reason why the cross compiler proposal is the way it is. > The big downside of the proposal is that the original was written in > a hurry to satisfy EuroPay. It also reflects the state of Forth cross > compiler design of about 15 years ago. I have prototyped a design > for which the current proposal is inappropriate. > > Stephen This is totally not true! There is no need to simulate the target processor on the host machine at compile-time. I think Stephen is referring to a technique that was used way back in the early 1980s. At that time people had a 6502 Forth system running, but compilation took too long. Their solution was to simulate the 6502 on a PDP-11 and run their Forth system in the simulator for improved speed. In a way this was cross-compilation, because the compiler was running on a PDP-11, but it wasn't really cross-compilation because it was just the traditional Forth system running the same way that it would have run on a 6502, just somewhat faster. On Thursday, November 26, 2009 at 3:24:06 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote: > Hugh Aguilar <hugoaguilar@rosycrew.com> writes: > >On Nov 25, 4:14=A0am, an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) > >wrote: > >> >On Nov 25, 8:57=3DA0am, Hugh Aguilar <hugoagui...@rosycrew.com> wrote: > >> >> I don't use gforth. What does that error message mean? What is a > >> >> "compile-only word?" > >> > >> A word without interpretation semantics. > >> > >> >It doesn't like you taking the address of ";" , though I don't > >> >understand why. > >> > >> Because ";" has no execution or interpretation semantics. =A0The > >> execution token returned by ['] represents the execution semantics, > >> but since ";" does not have that ... > > > >I don't understand how a word can not have execution semantics. > > That's quite simple: By not defining execution semantics in the > definition of the word in the standard document. Look up the > definition of ";" in the standard, and you will see that there is no > "Execution:" section there; and there are other labeled sections > there, so the "omitted label" sentence of 3.4.3.1 does not apply. > > >For immediate words (IF, ;, etc.) > > IF and ";" are not immediate words in the standard. A system can > implement them as immediate words, but a program cannot rely on their > immediacy. > > >I looked up ['] in the ANS-Forth document and it says: > > > >"Place name's execution token xt on the stack." > > What's the execution token of a word that has no execution semantics. > > Hmm, since you think that ";" is immediate, I guess you want an > execution token that, when executed, performs the compilation > semantics. You can get that as follows. Before the rest of the > program, define: > > : ; postpone ; ; immediate > > Now you have an immediate ";" with an execution semantics that's the > same as the compilation semantics, and you can tick it. > > >What I am saying is that I didn't have any warning that what I was > >doing in MACRO: was going to be a problem. > > A system that would tell us all non-standard usages would be nice, but > we don't have that. For now the solution is to test on as many > systems as possible. > > - anton This last one is a super-doozy! Here Anton Ertl invents disambiguifiers. I forgot about this, and it was years later when I invented disambiguifiers myself. Now, the irony is that everybody (including Anton Ertl) refuses to accept my disambiguifiers --- this is despite (actually because of) the fact that disambiguifiers are the key to allowing the ANS-Forth programmer to write his own outer-interpreter, which is the key to writing a cross-compiler --- nobody at Forth Inc. or MPE wants this to happen, because they make most of their money on selling cross-compilers and they don't want any competition. Also, btw, is it pretty humorous the way that Anton Ertl says that we have to just test our programs on as many ANS-Forth systems as possible to find out if the programs are ANS-Forth compatible? ANS-Forth is just too much fun! More fun than a barrel of monkeys!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-16 13:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2016May16.153714@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #47170 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>I'm probably below grade C but I don't quite see how to write a
>cross-compiler in pure ANS.
What problem do you see? Gforth's cross-compiler was originally
intended and claimed to be in pure ANS Forth; I did not check this,
and I guess that if it did have this property at one point, it has
probably lost it by now.
> There was an extension proposal that seems
>to be offline now:
>
> http://www.forth.com/downloads/ANS/XCpaper.pdf
Maybe these ones:
http://www.mpeforth.com/arena/XCtext5.PDF
http://www.mpeforth.com/arena/XCapp5.PDF
- 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 | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-16 07:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fda30235-3e7e-45ac-9373-efc3aa528de8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47192 |
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 6:40:39 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote: > Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes: > >I'm probably below grade C but I don't quite see how to write a > >cross-compiler in pure ANS. > > What problem do you see? Gforth's cross-compiler was originally > intended and claimed to be in pure ANS Forth; I did not check this, > and I guess that if it did have this property at one point, it has > probably lost it by now. ANS-Forth is totally crippled. I've already pointed out how both of the techniques used for writing a cross-compiler don't work under ANS-Forth. 1.) Use the built-in outer-interpreter --- you don't get literal numbers because LITERAL is not vectored so you can't change it to compile into the target system, but it always compiles into the host system. 2.) Write your own outer-interpreter --- you can't do this because FIND has been crippled to have ambiguous behavior on most of the words in ANS-Forth (everything that was traditionally immediate) --- but my disambiguifiers now fix this problem so this technique will now work. So, #2 above can be used, if you have the disambiguifiers. There are still problems though. ANS-Forth does not provide a way to smudge a word given its xt. This is necessary for local variables. I think that the ANS-Forth committee purposely sabotaged ANS-Forth to make it unusable for writing a cross-compiler --- Forth Inc. makes most of its money by selling cross-compilers, and Elizabeth Rather was the chair-person of the ANS-Forth committee --- coincidence, or not? Most of the people who claim that a cross-compiler can be written in ANS-Forth, are actually customers of either Forth Inc. or MPE. They don't have the source-code to their cross-compiler; they don't realize that the source-code is not ANS-Forth at all. They may also have a cross-compiler written using technique #1 above, and they just put up with the lack of literal numbers, vaguely assuming that this limitation is inherent in cross-compilers and wasn't purposeful sabotage of ANS-Forth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-16 21:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhdfbm$d2i$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47192 |
Am Mon, 16 May 2016 13:37:14 +0000 schrieb Anton Ertl: > Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes: >>I'm probably below grade C but I don't quite see how to write a >>cross-compiler in pure ANS. > > What problem do you see? Gforth's cross-compiler was originally > intended and claimed to be in pure ANS Forth; I did not check this, > and I guess that if it did have this property at one point, it has > probably lost it by now. Jens Wilke managed to run the cross compiler on iForth before Gforth was self-hosted, removing all bigForth-specific parts (bigForth was the original host for Gforth's cross compiler). Things necessary to do back then were handling of number-prefixes (like $CAFEBABE for hex), so part of the cross compiler contain copies of Gforth's sources. Hugh apparently has written his cross compiler using carnal knowledge of the Forth he was using, and can't think outside that box - he used hooks in his system to implement some functions like putting literals into the dictionary. A typical thing about a cross compiler is that you have to rewrite the entire outer interpreter. With recognizers, you could skip that, and just replace the number recognizer with a cross-compiling one. This could even resolve some remaining issues with our cross compiler for 32- >64 bit cross compilations, because it can't deal with 64 bit constants (we work around that problem were we need these constants). A cross compiler recognizer could handle 64 bit constants even when it runs on a 32 bit system. -- 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]
Page 2 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web