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 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 23:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6fd80aad-73f7-46ba-9118-3e0b2621a6d2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47441 |
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 2:38:55 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: > Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> wrote: > > So committee should explain how this features may be added. > > Otherwise it is chaotic and depended on committee members particular > > decisions. > > Of course it depends on committee members' decisions, but I would > certainly dispute "chaotic". > > In the end, programming language design is all about matters of taste > and judgement, and this is IMO especially true of languages like > Forth. In particular, vendors and industrial users of Forth come to > meetings with experience of features which have been tested and found > to be useful in multiple real-world applications. They're neither > playing games nor advocating cute features for their own sake. I am > aware of no better way of standardizing anything. Andrew Haley reminds me of Juergen Pintaske (salesman for MPE: http://mpeforth.com/about.htm) who attended EuroForth and declared that that Leon Wagner and Stephen Pelc should be anointed as "benevolent dictators for life" over the Forth language, and that they should alternate years on the throne. It makes sense for Juegen to say this, because he is paid to promote MPE, but why does Andrew say it? Just a natural-born suck-up... I am aware of no worse way of standardizing anything --- if you put the corporations in charge, they will do everything in their power to prevent Forth programmers from writing software in competition with them --- specifically, they make most of their money on selling cross-compilers, so they will cripple the Standard language to prevent anybody from writing a cross-compiler in Standard Forth, and they will denounce everybody who writes a cross-compiler for being non-standard (despite the fact that their own closed-source cross-compilers are also non-standard).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-24 13:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2016May24.151524@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #47441 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>In the end, programming language design is all about matters of taste
>and judgement, and this is IMO especially true of languages like
>Forth. In particular, vendors and industrial users of Forth come to
>meetings with experience of features which have been tested and found
>to be useful in multiple real-world applications. They're neither
>playing games nor advocating cute features for their own sake. I am
>aware of no better way of standardizing anything.
Well, TRAVERSE-WORDLIST did not have this background, and a vendor put
up significant resistance to it; after we had included it, another
vendor (previously indifferent) reported that his users found it very
useful.
- 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 | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-24 13:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ni1m9n$tbg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47441 |
hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > I am aware of no worse way of standardizing > anything --- if you put the corporations in > charge, they will do everything in their power > to prevent Forth programmers from writing > software in competition with them This wicked man is becoming a threat to the corporations; he is eliminating their bodyguards of lies. There ought to be a law that can be used to silence him. -- [H]e was prosecuted ... for "denying" the gas chambers and the six million figure. In July 1998 a Swiss court sentenced him to 15 months imprisonment, and to pay a large fine, because of his writings. Rather than serve the sentence, in August 2000 Graf went into exile. In 2001 he married a Russian historian in Moscow. www.revisionists.com/revisionists/graf.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-24 19:36 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ni2obm$120$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47477 |
On 5/24/2016 9:51 AM, WJ wrote: > hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > >> I am aware of no worse way of standardizing >> anything --- if you put the corporations in >> charge, they will do everything in their power >> to prevent Forth programmers from writing >> software in competition with them > > This wicked man is becoming a threat to the corporations; > he is eliminating their bodyguards of lies. > > There ought to be a law that can be used to silence him. There is the idea that he can be ignored... but too many can't seem to do that. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-20 22:50 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <Odydnc6Ua9r9vN3KnZ2dnUU7-bHNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #47368 |
On 5/20/16 11:16 AM, Ilya Tarasov wrote: >>> Can't you see in this case you simple use Forth interpreter once to >>> run another interpreter? >> >> Yes. > > On this way you can simple run MS Visual Studio from your Forth. > >> It's your Forth, so do what you like. The only interesting question >> for me is what should be standard. > > I know this is my Forth. Interesing question from me - what is standard goals? With no goal declared this is no chance to decide use it ir not. I don't know where ANS-Forth going and can't be sure it is going in right direction. The goals of any programming language standard are to promote portable code (applications that can run on multiple systems) and portable programmers (people who understand the principles and can move easily from one implementation to another). If you do not share those goals, there is no need for you to worry about standards. >>> So do you think you are right because you possesses this 'Spirit' >>> while I'm not? :) >> >> I don't know about you, but I certainly hope I do. >> Every language has an ethos, especially unusual languages like, say, >> Forth, Haskell, and LISP. In any of these languages one can program >> in a "conventional" way, but the results won't be great. (As the old >> saying, goes "The determined Real Programmer can write FORTRAN >> programs in any language.") > > Unfortunately, small and uncommon community often leads to 'white crow syndrome'. An idiomaic-precise translation is close to 'divergent', but has more deep meaning un Russian. Crows are black, so white crow is uncommon. Moreover, white crow constantly trying to focus others on its difference and use it as a feature. 'Forth-way' or, translated from Russian FIG, 'Spirit of Forth' is an easy way to stop any discussion and claim yourself as a winner. Standards encourage communities with shared understanding and tools. >> Without using Forth design (as described in e.g. Thinking FORTH and >> Programming a Problem-Oriented Language) FORTH can be an just annoying >> nuisance. All this SWAP DROP ROT blah. But use Forth in the way that >> it was intended and the results can be elagant and sparkling. Of >> course there are no guarantees, and in the end no substitute for good >> taste. > > I have a lot of examples where Forth was used properly, not by me only. I prefer to listen colleagues and add features they want, whenever it ANS-compatible or not. ANS is far from me and I have no projects or contract proposals based on ANS compatibility. My company is... my company :) I need some features to implement and don't want wait until someone comes to agrees me. So someone just lost me as a customer. Your primary loyalty is appropriately to your users. If you're a solo programmer, none of this matters. If you have colleagues and other users, it is beneficial to them to have shared documentation as to how things work. >> That's not my job! Everything you describe sounds fine and >> ANS-compatible to me. > > I don't see any serious troubles too. Why main loop in Forth must be untouchable? You told it sound fine, but other peoples may tell this is non-standard behavior and I must write another interpreter to add words or features. For example, having floating point was absolutely critical for me 20 years ago. This was easily done with vecorized NUMBER and LITERAL in SP-Forth. When I ask Andrey Cherezov for some changes to his SP-Forth (LITERAL was non-vectorized) he answer... right! 'This is non-standard, everyone may be happy with integer numbers or fixed point'. How do you think, is it prevents me from rewriting Forth according to my design? Nothing in Forth is untouchable. One does what the application and customer demand. >> No. I think you're misunderstanding what Chuck wrote. If you >> actually *use* a hook, then the probability of it being used is 1, not >> 0. Chuck was talking about *speculative* hooks, and there is a huge >> difference. > > But I point you to real used things, not to hooks for future use by someone. LITERAL is required. EMIT is very useful. DISPATCH-NUMBER was used by me yesterday to convert several files with numbers in text format. Reaction of ANS committee is more intresting thing. Why don't add useful things, if programmers want to see it? Oh, I see, this is dangerous because will lead to real projects and paid job ;) Real used things are good. Real projects and paid jobs are also good. A standards committee should be (and, in my experience is) made up of people accustomed to using the technology in real projects and paid jobs, as well as personal enrichment. But proposed hooks get evaluated by the perceived need of the whole group, not a subset. One person's hook is another's useless complication. A standards committee searches for widespread acceptance and understanding before adding a hook. That needn't inhibit anyone who needs that hook from implementing and using it; nothing is forbidden that gets the job done. If a hook or feature is publicized and becomes popular, it may be standardized. 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 | 2016-05-21 16:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <06da9d54-1056-4345-994c-5cefff10f66d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47403 |
On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 1:50:42 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 5/20/16 11:16 AM, Ilya Tarasov wrote: > >> It's your Forth, so do what you like. The only interesting question > >> for me is what should be standard. > > > > I know this is my Forth. Interesing question from me - what is standard goals? With no goal declared this is no chance to decide use it ir not. I don't know where ANS-Forth going and can't be sure it is going in right direction. > > The goals of any programming language standard are to promote portable > code (applications that can run on multiple systems) and portable > programmers (people who understand the principles and can move easily > from one implementation to another). If you do not share those goals, > there is no need for you to worry about standards. If you share this goal --- "promote portable code (applications that can run on multiple systems)" --- don't use ANS-Forth. ANS-Forth is full of ambiguity. The major ANS-Forth compilers represent multiple incompatible interpretations of what ANS-Forth is, but all of them are ANS-Forth because pretty much any interpretation is valid, but application code can't be ported between them. The reason why ANS-Forth is full of ambiguity, is that it was all about political concessions. Everybody wanted their compiler to be ANS-Forth compliant, so Elizabeth Rather said okay, they are standard, but they were incompatible with each other --- Elizabeth Rather did this just because she wanted them to sign on to ANS-Forth (ANSI primarily wants to see a list of people supporting the proposal in order for the proposal to get the ANSI stamp, but ANSI doesn't actually care about technical details such as whether the proposal is self-consistent or not). As an example, we have 6.1.1550 (the definition of FIND): "For a given string, the values returned by FIND while compiling may differ from those returned while not compiling." This was put in there in an effort to make cmForth ANS-Forth compliant too. What is pathetic about this, is that in cmForth FIND returned different values while compiling or not compiling because cmForth was a cross-compiler and hence colon changed CONTEXT while compiling the colon word, and semicolon changed CONTEXT back again afterward. The ANS-Forth committee didn't understand how FIND could return different values inside or outside of a colon definition because they didn't understand how cross-compilation works (didn't know that colon changes CONTEXT) and possibly didn't understand how vocabularies work either (didn't know that CONTEXT can be changed). What is also pathetic about this is that Charles Moore didn't ask to have cmForth be ANS-Forth, and Charles Moore has ignored ANS-Forth entirely --- this goofy sentence was inserted into the ANS-Forth document in the hopes that it would induce Charles Moore to care about ANS-Forth, but there was no evidence to indicate that he was going to start caring any time soon, or that he would ever care --- then Elizabeth Rather listed Charles Moore's name in the ANS-Forth document anyway! Most likely, she thought that ANSI would not give her the stamp of approval without Charles Moore's name listed, because he is the inventor of Forth, and she just hoped that Charles Moore wouldn't sue her for libel for claiming that he is a supporter when he isn't. Now Anton Ertl has seized upon this goofy sentence and has made it the basis for gForth --- FIND in gForth actually does return different values for certain words (not all words) depending upon what STATE is at the time that FIND is executed --- this is just bizarre!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-22 14:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <01f3483b-39e9-4c7d-86a2-9479da8bfd43@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47403 |
> The goals of any programming language standard are to promote portable > code (applications that can run on multiple systems) and portable > programmers (people who understand the principles and can move easily > from one implementation to another). If you do not share those goals, > there is no need for you to worry about standards. 'One man drives a car and his car has broken on the road. He quits and start to repair his car. A small boy told him: - Hey man, I know what you need to repair. - Really?! Tell me please! - You need to repair the car.' :) Ok, now I have you trivial explanation what is the standard. This is not so useful, because does not explain criterias of accepting or declining changes. Now it is up to committee and nobody can check the quality of their work without knowing what they want to achieve. There are many sets of portable code and libraries, but basic principes should be listed and accepted before moving forward. Portability or performance are just empty words without measurable criterias. > Standards encourage communities with shared understanding and tools. How many peoples or companies were encouraged last year? Where I can found hundreds of active Forth programmers and thousands of compatible libraries? This is rhetorical question. I know answer: nowhere. I know 'Forth Inc is on the market since the dinosaurs era', but this is not covering my demands. > Your primary loyalty is appropriately to your users. If you're a solo > programmer, none of this matters. If you have colleagues and other > users, it is beneficial to them to have shared documentation as to how > things work. Of course, we did. > Nothing in Forth is untouchable. One does what the application and > customer demand. However, I've heard many arguments, why it must not be used. First of all, 'you can always write a library ofr another word'. Thank you, I did. I also rewrite all code and receive my own version of Forth engine. I'm afraid, now you will switch to 'you should write compatible code and share it with others'. THIS is a problem to solve, not how to choose a name for another stack-playing word. > hook is another's useless complication. A standards committee searches > for widespread acceptance and understanding before adding a hook. That > needn't inhibit anyone who needs that hook from implementing and using > it; nothing is forbidden that gets the job done. If a hook or feature is > publicized and becomes popular, it may be standardized. Then you should explain your pocket boys they behavior is unacceptable. If they cannot discuss serious questions, they must not claim themselves as experts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-22 15:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <72a314d8-2d67-4628-9c1d-c4f6e7fed4d1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47425 |
On Sunday, May 22, 2016 at 2:05:00 PM UTC-7, Ilya Tarasov wrote: > > Standards encourage communities with shared understanding and tools. > > How many peoples or companies were encouraged last year? Where I can found hundreds of active Forth programmers and thousands of compatible libraries? This is rhetorical question. I know answer: nowhere. I know 'Forth Inc is on the market since the dinosaurs era', but this is not covering my demands. Within the last year? Ask instead how many within the last 22 years. The answer is the same --- none! --- ANS-Forth failed to provide portability, and portability is the purpose of having a standard, so ANS-Forth failed as a standard. > > Nothing in Forth is untouchable. One does what the application and > > customer demand. > > However, I've heard many arguments, why it must not be used. First of all, 'you can always write a library ofr another word'. Thank you, I did. I also rewrite all code and receive my own version of Forth engine. I'm afraid, now you will switch to 'you should write compatible code and share it with others'. THIS is a problem to solve, not how to choose a name for another stack-playing word. Nothing in Forth is untouchable for MPE --- MPE breaks with ANS-Forth compatibility on the first day of every project --- but if anybody else breaks with ANS-Forth compatibility, all of the ANS-Forth cult members howl that his code is non-standard and shouldn't be considered to be Forth at all, and that he is not a Forth programmer at all. > > hook is another's useless complication. A standards committee searches > > for widespread acceptance and understanding before adding a hook. That > > needn't inhibit anyone who needs that hook from implementing and using > > it; nothing is forbidden that gets the job done. If a hook or feature is > > publicized and becomes popular, it may be standardized. > > Then you should explain your pocket boys they behavior is unacceptable. If they cannot discuss serious questions, they must not claim themselves as experts. I think "pocket boys" is a great term --- Ilya has improved the English language by giving us this term! --- so much easier to spell than "sycophants." Elizabeth Rather says: "If a hook or feature is publicized and becomes popular, it may be standardized." This is a trick! My experience with Forth-200x is that the committee would tell me that my RfD has to be "vetted" on comp.lang.forth --- then on comp.lang.forth John Passaniti and/or Alex McDonald says that it "sucks" and is "crap" (plus Rickman and/or Ron Aaron suggest that I be given psychiatric treatment involving restraints and powerful drugs) --- then the Forth-200x committee says that my RfD didn't prove to be popular, so it is killed, but they are only following the demands of the "Forth community" and not acting like dictators. How about we only ask the opinion of computer programmers? Ignore the opinion of a sales-person and her pocket-boys.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-22 19:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nhte94$h24$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47425 |
On 5/22/2016 5:04 PM, Ilya Tarasov wrote: >> The goals of any programming language standard are to promote >> portable code (applications that can run on multiple systems) and >> portable programmers (people who understand the principles and can >> move easily from one implementation to another). If you do not >> share those goals, there is no need for you to worry about >> standards. > > 'One man drives a car and his car has broken on the road. He quits > and start to repair his car. A small boy told him: - Hey man, I know > what you need to repair. - Really?! Tell me please! - You need to > repair the car.' :) I wish I understood what your point was. > Ok, now I have you trivial explanation what is the standard. This is > not so useful, because does not explain criterias of accepting or > declining changes. Now it is up to committee and nobody can check the > quality of their work without knowing what they want to achieve. > There are many sets of portable code and libraries, but basic > principes should be listed and accepted before moving forward. > Portability or performance are just empty words without measurable > criterias. This is very simple. The standard is what the standard is. The purpose is to lay out a language with defined features so that compliant compilers can be written that people know how to use and that compliant programs may be written that will run on these compliant compilers. It is nothing more and hopefully, nothing less. If that doesn't suit you, then you can ignore the standard and do you own thing. You talk of "goals" and "criterias[sic] of accepting or declining changes" is not what standards are about. They may well have those features, but that is not essential to a user. I don't know why you are even talking about it. >> Standards encourage communities with shared understanding and >> tools. > > How many peoples or companies were encouraged last year? Where I can > found hundreds of active Forth programmers and thousands of > compatible libraries? This is rhetorical question. I know answer: > nowhere. I know 'Forth Inc is on the market since the dinosaurs era', > but this is not covering my demands.. Do you have "demands"? Why don't you share those with us? What about your "demands" do you not find in the available Forths? If you can't find your "demands" in any Forth, then obviously Forth is not for you unless you want to roll your own. >> Your primary loyalty is appropriately to your users. If you're a >> solo programmer, none of this matters. If you have colleagues and >> other users, it is beneficial to them to have shared documentation >> as to how things work. > > Of course, we did. > >> Nothing in Forth is untouchable. One does what the application and >> customer demand. > > However, I've heard many arguments, why it must not be used. First of > all, 'you can always write a library ofr another word'. Thank you, I > did. I also rewrite all code and receive my own version of Forth > engine. I'm afraid, now you will switch to 'you should write > compatible code and share it with others'. THIS is a problem to > solve, not how to choose a name for another stack-playing word. I don't think anyone cares how you write your code or if you share it. That is up to you. I don't know why you say that. Maybe I don't understand what you are saying. >> hook is another's useless complication. A standards committee >> searches for widespread acceptance and understanding before adding >> a hook. That needn't inhibit anyone who needs that hook from >> implementing and using it; nothing is forbidden that gets the job >> done. If a hook or feature is publicized and becomes popular, it >> may be standardized. > > Then you should explain your pocket boys they behavior is > unacceptable. If they cannot discuss serious questions, they must not > claim themselves as experts. Who are you exactly? Who are the "pocket boys"? If you find the behavior of the Forth community unacceptable, why are you here? -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-22 17:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fc99084f-f35e-4510-88d1-5f3310d26988@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47427 |
On Sunday, May 22, 2016 at 4:14:07 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote: > On 5/22/2016 5:04 PM, Ilya Tarasov wrote: > This is very simple. The standard is what the standard is. The purpose > is to lay out a language with defined features so that compliant > compilers can be written that people know how to use and that compliant > programs may be written that will run on these compliant compilers. > > It is nothing more and hopefully, nothing less. If that doesn't suit > you, then you can ignore the standard and do you own thing. This presumes that ANS-Forth is the only possible way to write a standard --- ANS-Forth is actually the worst possible way to write a standard --- I think Ilya wants a standard (so do I), but he wants it to make sense, which precludes ANS-Forth. > >> Standards encourage communities with shared understanding and > >> tools. > > > > How many peoples or companies were encouraged last year? Where I can > > found hundreds of active Forth programmers and thousands of > > compatible libraries? This is rhetorical question. I know answer: > > nowhere. I know 'Forth Inc is on the market since the dinosaurs era', > > but this is not covering my demands.. > > Do you have "demands"? Why don't you share those with us? What about > your "demands" do you not find in the available Forths? If you can't > find your "demands" in any Forth, then obviously Forth is not for you > unless you want to roll your own. He did roll his own Forth --- and built a Forth processor in an FPGA. By comparison, Rickman has not written a Forth compiler, nor has he ever written any Forth code at all, and he seems to know almost nothing about Forth (I think he read Koopman's book on stack-machines, but that is all). > >> hook is another's useless complication. A standards committee > >> searches for widespread acceptance and understanding before adding > >> a hook. That needn't inhibit anyone who needs that hook from > >> implementing and using it; nothing is forbidden that gets the job > >> done. If a hook or feature is publicized and becomes popular, it > >> may be standardized. > > > > Then you should explain your pocket boys they behavior is > > unacceptable. If they cannot discuss serious questions, they must not > > claim themselves as experts. > > Who are you exactly? Who are the "pocket boys"? If you find the > behavior of the Forth community unacceptable, why are you here? Rickman assumes that he speaks for and represents the "Forth community" --- that is not true; he speaks for and represents Elizabeth Rather (she speaks for and represents Forth Inc., where she works as a sales-person) --- Rickman is her latest "pocket boy" (first we had John Passaniti, then Alex McDonald, and now Rickman). People who claim to speak for and represent the Forth community annoy me --- same with people who claim to speak for and represent the Hispanic community, the Christian community, etc. --- they aren't elected; they are self-appointed blowhards (pathological liars with delusions of grandeur).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-22 20:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nhtkd6$13s$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47428 |
On 5/22/2016 8:11 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > Rickman assumes that he speaks for and represents the "Forth > community" --- that is not true; he speaks for and represents > Elizabeth Rather I don't normally reply to Hugh's rantings, but I want to set this straight. I speak only for myself. I replied to Ilya because I don't understand the nature or the basis of the complaint. Ilya seems to be complaining that the Forth ANS standard is not good enough or does not specify enough, but I don't really get it. So I am asking for a more complete, or maybe a more basic statement of the complaint. I have no idea if it is valid or not since I don't follow what Ilya is saying. As to Hugh, I mostly ignore him and his ravings. So far he has not shown that he is anything other than a minor lunatic who is "highly functioning" enough to stay out of a mental ward. I do have some concern for the safety of others he assails though. I don't think he has the means to reach any of the people he expresses such hatred for, but clearly he gives all appearances of being capable of causing harm. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 13:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhv1rq$61j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47429 |
rickman wrote: > As to Hugh, I mostly ignore > him and his ravings. So far > he has not shown that he is > anything other than a minor > lunatic who is "highly > functioning" enough to stay > out of a mental ward. I do > have some concern for the > safety of others he assails > though. I don't think he has > the means to reach any of the > people he expresses such > hatred for, Multiple-choice pop quiz. Fill in the blank: The pocket boy is expressing his ______ for Hugh. A. fondness B. hatred Hugh has made a living as a Forth programmer and has posted a lot of Forth code here. The pocket boy has done neither. Who has more right to speak for the "Forth community"? -- I don't believe in western morality, i.e. don't kill civilians or children.... The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle). --- Rabbi Manis Friedman web.archive.org/web/20090605154706/http://www.momentmag.com/Exclusive/2009/2009-06/200906-Ask_Rabbis.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 08:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6753b21e-977a-4e6b-a522-d00be0b9ab64@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47429 |
> I don't normally reply to Hugh's rantings, but I want to set this > straight. I speak only for myself. I replied to Ilya because I don't > understand the nature or the basis of the complaint. Ilya seems to be > complaining that the Forth ANS standard is not good enough or does not > specify enough, but I don't really get it. So I am asking for a more > complete, or maybe a more basic statement of the complaint. I have no > idea if it is valid or not since I don't follow what Ilya is saying. Compliant? :) What kind of compliant should I have? I'm completely independent of any ANS activity, so don't feel any inconvenience. I'm reading c.l.f. from time to time to build a snapshot of current situation. Nothing good here. If someone think this is ok and being geek is normal for any forther, this is up to them. I'm care about my colleagues and customers. Negative impact of ANS evolution can be used too, as an example of mistake. If there are more talking about specific rules of closed fan club, I think it is a temporary crysis, because Forth is very specific language and should not be forgotten. Everyone can choose to be a part of solution or a part of problem...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 13:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nhv151$3a6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47428 |
hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > Do you have "demands"? Why don't you share those with us? What about > > your "demands" do you not find in the available Forths? If you can't > > find your "demands" in any Forth, then obviously Forth is not for you > > unless you want to roll your own. > > He did roll his own Forth --- and built a > Forth processor in an FPGA. > > By comparison, Rickman has not written a > Forth compiler, nor has he ever written > any Forth code at all, and he seems to > know almost nothing about Forth (I think > he read Koopman's book on stack-machines, > but that is all). Perhaps he has written no code in any language. Being able to write code is not one of the requirements for being one of Mrs. Rather's pocket boys. We can't expect pocket boys to be more capable than their mommy. -- If confirmed, Garland would be the fourth Jewish justice on the nation's highest court, which is comprised entirely of Jews and Catholics. The three current Jewish members of the Supreme Court are Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elana Kagan, and Stephen Breyer. www.jta.org/2016/03/16/news-opinion/united-states/obama-to-name-jewish-federal-judge-to-supreme-court
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 07:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <895b722c-c2e3-490b-85a1-c9b5165befc9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47427 |
> This is very simple. The standard is what the standard is. The purpose > is to lay out a language with defined features so that compliant > compilers can be written that people know how to use and that compliant > programs may be written that will run on these compliant compilers. Many languages may be designed to conform these statements. On this way, programmers may be very very far from the original Forth idea, so no more people will come to support them. > You talk of "goals" and "criterias[sic] of accepting or declining > changes" is not what standards are about. They may well have those Really? Do you think the standard allow it's authors to do everything they want, just because they was first who claims the name of standard? Every complex document must state goals, tasks to solve and ways to achieve that goals. 'To have portable code' means absolutely nothing, because there are many ways to achieve this. Forth may be easily lost here. > Do you have "demands"? Why don't you share those with us? What about > your "demands" do you not find in the available Forths? If you can't > find your "demands" in any Forth, then obviously Forth is not for you > unless you want to roll your own. 1. Forth is very simple to write. 2. Computer hardware, algorithms and other stuffs around programming languages are moving forward. 3. Real projects demands particular features to implement. 4. Forth fans do not want to hear anything about improving language and align it to user requirements. What conslusion you can make? Ok, I will do: qualified programmer can write his own Forth implementation and don't ask permission from peoples who don't want to grant it. Why do you ever think I need blessing from gurus? See p.1 from my list. > Who are you exactly? Who are the "pocket boys"? If you find the > behavior of the Forth community unacceptable, why are you here? I'm here, because I'm a part of Forth community too. As long as I use Forth and want to improve it. I don't feel you really need a complete list who I am, while my questions and arguments looks intresting :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 18:55 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <nhv8us$14k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47446 |
On 23/05/2016 17:58, Ilya Tarasov wrote: > What conslusion you can make? Ok, I will do: qualified programmer can write his own Forth implementation and don't ask permission from peoples who don't want to grant it. Why do you ever think I need blessing from gurus? See p.1 from my list. ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 16:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d8048ea2-0a27-4fb4-827c-abe1ac82911f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #47448 |
понедельник, 23 мая 2016 г., 18:55:36 UTC+3 пользователь Ron Aaron написал: > On 23/05/2016 17:58, Ilya Tarasov wrote: > > > What conslusion you can make? Ok, I will do: qualified programmer can write his own Forth implementation and don't ask permission from peoples who don't want to grant it. Why do you ever think I need blessing from gurus? See p.1 from my list. > > ;) Btw, 8th looks intresting ;) It seems it has roadmap and target auditory. This is more important than compatibility with 20+ years old document.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-24 06:54 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <ni0j2d$e57$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47451 |
On 24/05/2016 02:00, Ilya Tarasov wrote: > Btw, 8th looks intresting ;) It seems it has roadmap and target auditory. This is more important than compatibility with 20+ years old document. Obviously I agree :o My previous Forth (Reva) was also not ANS compatible, and there are still people using it even though I haven't maintained it for a while.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-24 00:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ni0jmj$fj1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47456 |
On 5/23/2016 11:54 PM, Ron Aaron wrote: > > > On 24/05/2016 02:00, Ilya Tarasov wrote: > >> Btw, 8th looks intresting ;) It seems it has roadmap and target auditory. This is more important than compatibility with 20+ years old document. > > Obviously I agree :o > > My previous Forth (Reva) was also not ANS compatible, and there are > still people using it even though I haven't maintained it for a while. And that would be the reason for using standards. I expect they have little choice since they would need to rework their code to run under other tools, no? If they had coded to a standard, they could then switch to another tool without problem. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-24 07:19 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <ni0khv$hlp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #47457 |
On 24/05/2016 07:04, rickman wrote: > On 5/23/2016 11:54 PM, Ron Aaron wrote: >> My previous Forth (Reva) was also not ANS compatible, and there are >> still people using it even though I haven't maintained it for a while. > > And that would be the reason for using standards. I expect they have > little choice since they would need to rework their code to run under > other tools, no? If they had coded to a standard, they could then > switch to another tool without problem. No, they continue to use Reva because it suits them. As far as standards are concerned, the "ANS Forth" standard is weak enough that "standard compliant" code may not run on a different "standard" vendor's implementation. We see examples of that all the time on c.l.f. Because at the end of the day, to get work done you invariably use vendor-specific code (e.g. GCC intrinsics or some Forth's extensions) and as soon as you've done that, your code becomes non-portable even if it is still within the standard. Of course you can "work around" that with #ifdefs or the equivalent, that's not the point. Every standard which has "wiggle room" has this same issue: SQL, C etc ... all allow vendor-specific enhancements or differences, which make porting between vendors a sometimes hair-raising experience. And yes, I speak from experience. Since Reva never advertised itself as "standard" anything, its users knew what they were getting into, and they were interested in whatever perceived benefits it provided. Since Reva is "public domain", they can modify it however they want (and there are apparently some offshoots).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web