Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #49933 > unrolled thread
| Started by | foxaudioresearch@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-10 13:06 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-08-28 22:34 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 202 — 33 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
"Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-10 13:06 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-10 21:00 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 23:26 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 00:25 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 01:29 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 16:09 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-11 19:31 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-12 12:22 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 19:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-11 18:23 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 21:57 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" mhx@iae.nl - 2016-08-11 23:20 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 23:49 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-15 08:52 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 02:31 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-15 22:43 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-08-15 14:49 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-08-21 21:24 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-08-22 07:04 +0300
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2016-08-26 07:12 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 09:18 +0300
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 21:12 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 00:04 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 01:34 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 02:17 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 08:53 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 11:54 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 17:38 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 20:02 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-15 07:10 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-08-15 08:34 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-15 01:11 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 21:23 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-28 14:26 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-29 01:44 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 00:45 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 14:56 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 15:02 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 22:05 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 21:05 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 22:15 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 23:39 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 00:03 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-13 00:07 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 07:35 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 17:17 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 20:04 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 20:38 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 20:46 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 06:02 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-14 23:04 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 16:01 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-13 21:53 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 07:45 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-08-15 06:44 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-08-14 19:57 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-14 11:17 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 13:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-14 14:09 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 15:48 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-14 18:34 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 02:24 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-20 19:26 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 14:58 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-21 15:51 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-21 15:52 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-24 16:35 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2016-08-14 10:32 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-14 13:55 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 21:37 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-28 15:25 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2016-08-28 16:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-28 16:44 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 20:00 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 20:39 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-12 22:11 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" dhoffman888@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 03:39 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 20:18 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 22:35 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 22:52 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 22:55 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2016-08-13 11:31 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-15 11:47 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-15 12:05 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-15 08:21 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 22:54 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-12 14:51 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 21:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-13 18:04 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 23:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-08-13 18:47 +1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 22:59 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 20:54 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 12:36 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 15:10 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 17:45 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-15 18:40 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 20:18 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:18 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-10 15:38 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-10 16:18 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-11 11:39 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 00:23 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 01:56 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 20:28 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 00:23 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-11 11:26 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 11:06 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 11:51 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 01:48 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 01:52 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 09:42 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 13:36 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 07:06 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 14:10 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 00:46 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-16 00:57 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 04:45 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 02:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 03:04 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-18 09:30 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 07:44 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-18 11:36 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 13:41 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-18 14:01 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 14:33 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 16:23 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 17:28 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 18:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 19:07 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 01:09 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-18 17:21 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 23:36 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 00:11 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 01:44 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 01:46 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:29 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-31 03:43 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-19 03:49 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 02:18 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-20 05:05 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 15:13 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-21 16:33 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 19:37 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-21 20:02 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-21 21:36 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-08-22 03:36 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-19 08:40 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 15:59 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-19 16:28 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 16:31 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-19 17:24 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 19:48 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-19 20:17 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 02:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 02:19 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 03:13 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 07:03 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-20 12:21 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 20:39 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-20 15:41 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-20 14:40 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-20 17:25 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-20 20:14 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" julian.fondren@endurance.com - 2016-08-20 20:30 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-08-21 13:46 -0500
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-21 20:13 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 12:37 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-21 21:11 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-21 13:19 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 19:03 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-22 06:45 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-21 21:38 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:43 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-21 08:57 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:40 +0200
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-21 09:57 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 11:29 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 11:56 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 12:11 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 12:26 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-21 12:52 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-22 07:12 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 23:43 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-21 21:40 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-08-22 17:20 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-21 13:01 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 13:16 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-08-21 20:19 +0100
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-08-21 17:41 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 02:09 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-20 20:04 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-08-19 09:40 -1000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 13:48 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 01:13 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 04:26 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 03:06 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 11:54 -0400
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-26 20:43 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-08-27 04:20 -0700
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-08-28 00:04 +0000
Re: "Forth is Sudoku for programmers" albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-08-28 22:34 +0200
Page 2 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 11 Next page →
| From | Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-26 09:18 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <npomva$kv2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #50484 |
On 26/08/2016 08:12, Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > It's probably this: > https://github.com/GeraldWodni/swig Thank you; you're probably right.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-28 21:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <npvd3e$ipc$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #50484 |
In article <867fb4t8ok.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org>,
Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> wrote:
>Ron Aaron wrote:
>> Bernd Paysan wrote:
>>> Gerald Wodni wrote a Swig module which parses the C header file and
>>> outputs SwiftForth, VFX, and Gforth-style bindings.
>>
>> This sounds interesting. Is it publicly available?
>
>It's probably this:
>https://github.com/GeraldWodni/swig
I've a different approach:
First :
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <sys/times.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <linux/unistd.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <termios.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <setjmp.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <asm/ioctls.h>
#include <sched.h>
Then:
/*****************************************************************************/
/* */
/* This c-source is only intended to be print a number of EUQATES */
/* in form that is palatable for the assemblers used in generating */
/* ciforth. */
/* */
/*****************************************************************************/
/* Steal the information what value B has, leave it in A */
#define STEAL(A,B) printf("%s\tEQU\t0x%x\n", A, B );
/* Have a A that has the same value than in C. */
#define STEALNAME(A) STEAL( #A, A)
/* Have a A that has the number of a system call */
#define STEALSYS(A) STEAL( #A, __NR_##A)
In this way the interpretation of all those include files is done
by the c-compiler, not by a moving-target program, that I've
to write and maintain.
STEALSYS(fork)
results in
0x49 EQU __NR_fork ( Or if needed "$49 CONSTANT sys_fork" )
It can handle sizes:
STEAL("SIZE_TERMIO",sizeof(struct termios))
-->
0x42 EQU SIZE-TERMIO
and the technique can be used to handle
field offsets, but then it becomes cumbersome quickly.
It generates only the equates I request, but -- guess what --
if I want to add cloning to my assembler source, I've to add
cloning anyway.
Groetjes Albert
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 00:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8cb43dc0-f642-442f-b2ce-72650caa544b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #49972 |
On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 9:23:05 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > Good libraries could in theory be a great asset to Forth, but every time > this subject comes up it's always structured as "somebody [else] should > write more libraries," not "here's a great library I have written." This is just too funny! LOL! So, the blame for the lack of code-libraries goes to c.l.f. folks such as myself, and not to Forth Inc. --- really??? This comes from the same person who made the following comment regarding the general-purpose data-structures in my novice package: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The only reason I continue reading c.l.f. is the entertainment value --- this stuff is just too funny! --- professional comedians couldn't come up with such great comedy! > People on clf would rather write a DIY Forth system than a library. Now you are insisting that the "Forth Way" is to pay $$$ for SwiftForth that generates code that runs about 1/4 the speed necessary for commercial programming, but a public-domain Forth system is not the "Forth Way" at all --- and you expect people like me to write code-libraries for SwiftForth for free (I did actually write a significant amount of SwiftForth assembly-language in the novice-package to boost SwiftForth's abysmal speed to at least marginal levels).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 01:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <37e2ee67-95ab-4f05-9f30-30c4e89059ab@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #49983 |
On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 1:16:58 AM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > Forth Inc. and MPE ... benefit because [Forth programmers] [get] trapped in > ... Gforth They sell Forth systems to Forth programmers. If someone writes an application that's 'trapped in gforth', then they can't use it with these systems anyway, and so Forth Inc. and MPE may lose money that more portability would've given them. Actually if there were no portability concerns it might be easier to sell Forth systems to Forth *users*. You could have a product that runs under gforth normally, but if customers start running into CPU issues with it, they can purchase another Forth and run it with that, and get instant performance advantages. Offering a product with so-so default performance and then selling people ways to make it run better is AFAIK part of Magento's actual business strategy. > they want people like me to be [Forth programmers], but they don't > want us to write [Forth systems] in competition with them. If a hundred people showed up to clf today, and 99 of them said "I want to write a Forth system", and one said "I want to write some Forth programs", would you prefer this ratio or the inverse one? Isn't there also some self interest in your answer? > the only real effect of ANS-Forth is to prevent Forthers from writing > commercial software --- the only people who benefit from ANS-Forth are Forth > Inc. and MPE, That's odd. I would think that they'd benefit a lot more from having more contracts like "we have an internal Forth program without a maintainer, you guys do Forth stuff right, can you get it to run the same on our new OSX desktops?" > Really? There are no job offerings for Forth programmers. That's too bad. You should write something good enough that people start becoming Forth programmers just to work with it, and to solve workplace problems with it, after which workplaces start wanting Forth programmers to maintain the good software they have. On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 1:49:28 AM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > I haven't forgotten however, that you took my LC53 encryption-cracking > program and posted it on comp.lang.forth with my name removed from the > copyright notice, ... > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/wP5nw1ClzsM%5B1-25%5D From that: > \ Copyright (C) 2009 by some cab driver That's you, isn't it? On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 2:04:24 AM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 9:23:05 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > Good libraries could in theory be a great asset to Forth, but every time > > this subject comes up it's always structured as "somebody [else] should > > write more libraries," not "here's a great library I have written." > > So, the blame for the lack of code-libraries goes to [Forth programmers] and not to [Forth vendors]? You're the only one talking about blame. She's just said that 1. good libraries would be good 2. there's a lot more promotion of libraries than there is the writing of them I imagine that the 100th hundred that someone says "hey, you know what we need? libraries!", you cheer a bit less enthusiastically than the first time. Nobody opposes other people writing libraries. Go and write them. Right now we have two good sites for Forth stuff: http://theforth.net/ http://soton.mpeforth.com/flag/ Also: * searching through github, github lists, etc. * bitbucket.org knows what Forth is, but searching for repos by * 'Forth' doesn't work at the moment. If you make a big useful library, I imagine that it would be easy to get it listed on FLAG. I imagine that it would be harder to get your 'kilosecond time converter' library onto FLAG. If you make a gforth-compatible library of any size under theforth.net's framework, then you can create an account and upload it theforth.net yourself. A kilosecond time converter? sure! A library that loads normally under SwiftForth but that needs some preludes loaded first for other languages? Well you may be able to upload it there's no provision for that kind of stuff... Skipping to the end of this discussion, I don't think the infrastructure matters that much. The people advocating for libraries are still wrong. If people would write useful libraries, their very usefulness would lead to the infrastructure. But I do think PACKAGE ... END-PACKAGE would help a lot. As would an even less likely OO standard. > > People on clf would rather write a DIY Forth system than a library. > > Now you are insisting that the "Forth Way" is to pay $$$ for SwiftForth No, you're hallucinating again. There's no reference to SwiftForth here. If people wrote lots of libraries for gforth, that would be fine for everyone. Libraries can be ported. If theforth.net were to take off, it would be even more likely to grow some features to assist with portable code, with shims and such for specific systems. github.com thought all Forth source files were 'F-Sharp' or 'Fortran' or whatever until it grew popular enough that it could justify attending to lesser used languages. Wealth yields wealth and poverty yields poverty. It would be foolish and self-destructive, not clever and evil, for Forth companies to sabotage Forth in order to *benefit* in some way. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lawrencedo99@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 02:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9f9b8329-a9c7-4eee-a09c-cdae3b30ae68@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #49991 |
On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 8:34:27 PM UTC+12, Julian Fondren wrote: > It would be foolish and self-destructive, not clever and evil, for Forth > companies to sabotage Forth in order to *benefit* in some way. Vendor lock-in is a chronic and recurring affliction in many parts of the computer industry. That’s what destroyed Unix and let Microsoft Windows dominate. Though now it is what is killing Windows and allowing Linux to take its place... There is a thriving Free Software ecosystem built around a great many programming languages and other components right now, though seemingly not around Forth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 08:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f6d244f5-c5d6-4025-8777-1d6ba8bb2cd8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #49993 |
On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 2:17:22 AM UTC-7, lawren...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 8:34:27 PM UTC+12, Julian Fondren wrote: > > > It would be foolish and self-destructive, not clever and evil, for Forth > > companies to sabotage Forth in order to *benefit* in some way. > > Vendor lock-in is a chronic and recurring affliction in many parts of the computer industry. That’s what destroyed Unix and let Microsoft Windows dominate. Though now it is what is killing Windows and allowing Linux to take its place... > > There is a thriving Free Software ecosystem built around a great many programming languages and other components right now, though seemingly not around Forth. Yes. ANS-Forth has severe problems --- anybody who writes commercial-quality Forth code has to abandon ANS-Forth on the first day of the project and just go with vendor-specific code (exactly what they would do if there were no standard) --- ANS-Forth is only capable of toy programs (Sudoku solvers, for example) that students write for educational purposes. The "Forth Way" that is promoted by Forth Inc. doesn't involve structs --- no book from Forth Inc. has mentioned structs and there is no evidence that anybody at Forth Inc. knows what structs are (maybe they do know, but they consider this to be proprietary) --- without structs you can't have data-structures, so you can't have data, so you are limited to writing little toy programs like in the "Starting Forth" book. Forth was the first programming language I learned. Previously I had programmed in line-number BASIC, but I don't really consider that to be a programming language. I had taken a class in Pascal in high-school, and I learned about records (aka structs), but I didn't really know what they were for because we never wrote any programs in the class. I didn't know what structs were until I learned C on my own after high-school --- then I went back to Forth and tried to implement structs in Forth --- I have structs in the novice-package now.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 11:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <007681f6-8931-4f83-9b38-1ab0741d663b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #49997 |
n Friday, August 12, 2016 at 10:53:22 AM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > Yes. ANS-Forth has severe problems --- anybody who writes commercial-quality Forth code has to abandon ANS-Forth on the first day of the project and just go with vendor-specific code (exactly what they would do if there were no standard) --- ANS-Forth is only capable of toy programs (Sudoku solvers, for example) that students write for educational purposes. > On the first day of writing a Straight Forth program, you'll have to "abandon it and go with vendor-specific code" the moment you need networking, or graphics, or an interface with a specific version of PostgreSQL. Does it follow that Straight Forth has "severe problems"? No, it just means that you don't know what standards are for and can't help but bury any actual point you may have in hyperbolic nonsense. I think your actual point is probably "structs and some other stuff should be standardized AND ALSO (when you remind me that they *are* standardized) have a reference implementation that satisfies me." Well, wanting a larger standard is fine and all. But in the case we're talking about, Forth was insulted because someone tried to port nearly standard code to a Forth system that didn't implemement all of ANS. A larger standard would just mean that such Forth systems would fail to implement even more words. pfth calls itself an "ANS Forth interpreter". Maybe some other brand would be useful as a way to express that a system will also be a relatively easy system to port Forth programs to. How about a passenger seat metaphor? Business Class (easy to port to due to extensive words) First Class (as above + programmer luxuries like LOCATE) Economy Class (standard but minimal) > The "Forth Way" that is promoted by Forth Inc. doesn't involve structs * Forth200x is part of an evil plot. * Another part of the same plot: opposition to structures. * Forth200x actually standardizes structures * --but the reference implementation isn't optimal! How eeeevil! * --and the docs don't *emphasize* a feature I now feel is essential! #JustHughThings Or how about * Forth Inc. just wants you to buy SwiftForth. * SwiftForth comes with SWOOP , providing structures and more. * Forth Inc. are opposed to structures. Man it's really difficult sometimes to get your malicious characterizations to agree with your analyses of sinister plots. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 17:38 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nolflf$ue$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #50000 |
On 8/12/2016 2:54 PM, Julian Fondren wrote: > n Friday, August 12, 2016 at 10:53:22 AM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: >> Yes. ANS-Forth has severe problems --- anybody who writes commercial-quality Forth code has to abandon ANS-Forth on the first day of the project and just go with vendor-specific code (exactly what they would do if there were no standard) --- ANS-Forth is only capable of toy programs (Sudoku solvers, for example) that students write for educational purposes. >> > > On the first day of writing a Straight Forth program, you'll have to > "abandon it and go with vendor-specific code" the moment you need > networking, or graphics, or an interface with a specific version of > PostgreSQL. > > Does it follow that Straight Forth has "severe problems"? I have a question for you. Has anything you've written to Hugh in the past had any impact on his opinions or actions? If not, why do you keep trying to explain anything to him? There is a character in the ham radio groups who loves to argue with people. His MO is to ask what seems to be an innocent question only to respond to replies with inane explanations of his own. Others try to correct him and when he refuses to accept any rational discussion they end up arguing with him. He sees it as others bashing him, but he is always happy to respond with his own vitriol. In one group in particular they finally got tired of him and shunned him, ignoring all his posts. When no one responded to him he left for greener pastures. I think he was arguing with people in the Raspberry Pi group for a while. It could work here if people would stop responding to Hugh's insanity as if reason would have any impact whatsoever. I mean, how long will you continue responding to Hugh rationally when it fails to get a rational reply? At some point you are the one who is being irrational. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 20:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3fcb85df-2bac-4cd0-828f-3b3afbc46656@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50001 |
On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 4:38:57 PM UTC-5, rickman wrote: > I have a question for you. Has anything you've written to Hugh in the > past had any impact on his opinions or actions? Yes. Thanks for asking. > > There is a character in the ham radio groups who loves to argue with > people. His MO is to ask what seems to be an innocent question only to > respond to replies with inane explanations of his own. Others try to > correct him and when he refuses to accept any rational discussion they > end up arguing with him. He sees it as others bashing him, but he is > always happy to respond with his own vitriol. > Sounds like an amusing fellow, at least on a communications medium where he can't drown out other discussion. Once you understood his MO, and could clearly see the bait he was laying out, you should've been less irritated by it, and could've even had some fun with it. Familiarity breeds contempt; it also breeds tolerance. A stranger that makes a pass at your wife, you might hang; when Rasputin does it, well, that's just the way he is. That fellow has nothing to do with Hugh however, who is characterized by unprompted attacks on third parties. > In one group in > particular they finally got tired of him and shunned him, ignoring all > his posts. When no one responded to him he left for greener pastures. > I think he was arguing with people in the Raspberry Pi group for a while. > > It could work here if people would stop responding to Hugh's insanity I think there might've been an age, before I came around, when people weren't so obsessed with filtering conversation. Maybe they only weren't when duelling was common, and people were more circumspect about what they said in the first place. But for my whole life, it's been a progression from personal ignore lists to moderated forums to shadow bans to shared ignore lists managed by bots to having the Clintons express their dissatisfaction with your speech by having you whacked. Still at the 'personal ignore lists' stage, I decided that these tools were really only appropriate for spam or abuse. People who merely annoyed me, I could ignore well enough with only my brain doing the ignoring. That's served me well. > I mean, how long will you > continue responding to Hugh rationally when it fails to get a rational > reply? At some point you are the one who is being irrational. > Rather, it seems that you think I'm talking to Hugh like a janitor trying to open a door to which he's forgotten the key. You, watching me repeatedly fail to open the door, have decided that the key actually isn't on my keychain, or the lock is jammed, and that I'm wasting my time. And it would be irritating to watch that. But that's not what I'm doing. Please don't worry about my goals. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-15 07:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2016Aug15.091048@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #50011 |
Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> writes:
>But that's not what I'm doing. Please don't worry about my goals.
Here's a Hughish theory: You are paid by Forth, Inc. to provoke him to
spend even more time on posting rather than developing Straight Forth,
because Staright Forth, when it is finally there, will blow SwiftForth
and everything else away, so better delay that day.
- 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 | Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-15 08:34 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <norrat$lj7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #50132 |
On 15/08/16 08:10, Anton Ertl wrote: > Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> writes: >> But that's not what I'm doing. Please don't worry about my goals. > > Here's a Hughish theory: You are paid by Forth, Inc. to provoke him to > spend even more time on posting rather than developing Straight Forth, > because Staright Forth, when it is finally there, will blow SwiftForth > and everything else away, so better delay that day. > > - anton > It's not often you get as much as a chuckle on clf, especially when Hugh is in the mix, but this one made me laugh out loud. Thank you. -- Alex
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-15 01:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8cf2243e-a57f-4e5c-848a-d549e4d8b7e9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50132 |
On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 12:14:38 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote: > Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> writes: > >But that's not what I'm doing. Please don't worry about my goals. > > Here's a Hughish theory: You are paid by Forth, Inc. to provoke him to > spend even more time on posting rather than developing Straight Forth, > because Staright Forth, when it is finally there, will blow SwiftForth > and everything else away, so better delay that day. Ultimately, Forth-200x is known by the company that they keep --- Julien Fondren, Alex McDonald --- total suck ups.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-28 21:23 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <npvdng$irl$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #50001 |
In article <nolflf$ue$1@dont-email.me>, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >On 8/12/2016 2:54 PM, Julian Fondren wrote: >> n Friday, August 12, 2016 at 10:53:22 AM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: >>> Yes. ANS-Forth has severe problems --- anybody who writes commercial-quality Forth code has to abandon ANS-Forth on the first day of the project and just go with vendor-specific code (exactly what they would do if there were no standard) --- ANS-Forth is only capable of toy programs (Sudoku solvers, for example) that students write for educational purposes. >>> >> >> On the first day of writing a Straight Forth program, you'll have to >> "abandon it and go with vendor-specific code" the moment you need >> networking, or graphics, or an interface with a specific version of >> PostgreSQL. >> >> Does it follow that Straight Forth has "severe problems"? > >I have a question for you. Has anything you've written to Hugh in the >past had any impact on his opinions or actions? If not, why do you keep >trying to explain anything to him? Have you ever heard of Duehring? If so it is probably because of the brilliant philosophical work known as the anti-Duehring (though that it is not its real title) written by Marx's comrade-in-arms Engels. Duehring himself had no merits at all, but his bombastic works implicitly posed the challenge to carefully formulate the philosophical foundations of scientific socialism. So humanity is eternally indebted to this person ... c.l.f would be a much duller place without WJ and HA. >-- > >Rick C -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-28 14:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <17319234-b7f0-49b0-a878-e7282ecb96fb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50520 |
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 12:15:20 PM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <nolflf$ue$1@dont-email.me>, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > >On 8/12/2016 2:54 PM, Julian Fondren wrote: > >> n Friday, August 12, 2016 at 10:53:22 AM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > >>> Yes. ANS-Forth has severe problems --- anybody who writes commercial-quality Forth code has to abandon ANS-Forth on the first day of the project and just go with vendor-specific code (exactly what they would do if there were no standard) --- ANS-Forth is only capable of toy programs (Sudoku solvers, for example) that students write for educational purposes. > >>> > >> > >> On the first day of writing a Straight Forth program, you'll have to > >> "abandon it and go with vendor-specific code" the moment you need > >> networking, or graphics, or an interface with a specific version of > >> PostgreSQL. > >> > >> Does it follow that Straight Forth has "severe problems"? > > > >I have a question for you. Has anything you've written to Hugh in the > >past had any impact on his opinions or actions? If not, why do you keep > >trying to explain anything to him? > > Have you ever heard of Duehring? If so it is probably because of the > brilliant philosophical work known as the anti-Duehring (though that it > is not its real title) written by Marx's comrade-in-arms Engels. > Duehring himself had no merits at all, but his bombastic works > implicitly posed the challenge to carefully formulate the > philosophical foundations of scientific socialism. > > So humanity is eternally indebted to this person ... You are indirectly saying that I "have no merits at all." This is just a typical troll attack from an ANS-Forth cult member. You are trying to bait me. You hope to get an emotional response out of me, such as: "Fuck you, Albert!" > c.l.f would be a much duller place without WJ and HA. I mark all of WJ's posts as spam. All he does is post Ruby code or Gauche Scheme code or whatever. He has never posted Forth code and appears to know exactly nothing about Forth. Also, his taglines routinely reference rape of women or children, implying that this is done by Blacks or Moslems. WJ's posts have no merit at all. Albert v.d.Horst's posts have no merit either. Here is an example: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.lang.forth/lc53%7Csort:date/comp.lang.forth/qqlp1gZnVic/7-V_XIIAu6sJ You were just attacking me. Apparently this is why you think that c.l.f. would be "dull" without me --- because you get a sick thrill out of attacking me. You lied repeatedly in this thread. You posted code that looked like my code but was sabotaged so that it wouldn't work, then you claimed that this was my code. Even Bernd Paysan was embarrassed by your blatant lies and tried to talk you down a bit: On Monday, November 25, 2013 at 4:20:14 PM UTC-7, Bernd Paysan wrote: > Albert van der Horst wrote: > > It sounds like you have a whole machinery in place to tests rng's. > > Would you mind adding LC53 to the list? > > > > \ Comma for clarity, not a double number. > > : LC53 -5 um* -333,333,333 + nip ; > > Hm, wasn't Hugh's LC53 > > : lc53 -333333333 um* -5 um/mod drop ; > > ? Don't make Hugh look more stupid than he actually is ;-). This was not the only example however. You repeatedly posted non-working code that you claimed to be my code, but it wasn't --- my code works. You originally started the thread demanding that I remove the reference to my LC53 from the linear-congruential prng page on Wikipedia. I did remove it, as well as all other references to my code anywhere on Wikipedia --- you weren't satisfied however --- you continued to attack me even after you had your demand satisfied, apparently just because it was fun for you to do so. Finally you admitted that my LC53 worked, but you said that I got "lucky" in finding 32-bit constants that worked: On Thursday, November 28, 2013 at 6:47:27 AM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <eqKdnSUOWM1xtgrPnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@supernews.com>, > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote: > >Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: > >> > >> LC53 is a maximum period linear congruent random number generator - > >> so far, so good. It has the usual problems of LCGs, so it doesn't > >> pass any serious randomness test suite. It is certainly not worse > >> than others, > > > >Did you really mean to say that? All we know is that it is not > >certainly worse. I doubt very much that a generator chosen without > >any theoretical justification or testing is as good as any. It's not > >impossible, but it would be a fantastic stroke of luck. > > Sure Hugh got lucky, but it is not as fantastic as you might think. > The choice of a prime just under 2^32 is a bit of sound reasoning, > as soon as you're willing to pay the price for a mod operation. > It is known that in the row 'a' 'a^2' mod p etc. 'a' cannot be recovered > easily from 'a^2'. Square root of 'a' modulo a prime is as hard as > factoring, so if you choose a random looking 'a' larger than the root, > the second number is pretty unrelated. > Then test for a large period. This can be done without even the > knowledge that there are multipliers with a large period, or realizing > what the period is. Brute force will do it. All of this seems like quite a lot of criticism over nothing. Bernd Paysan is calling me "stupid" because I wrote a linear-congruential prng rather than use one of the many prngs available that provide better randomness. I actually used an LC prng though because I was writing an encryption-cracking program and wanted something fairly easy to crack. I never said that LC53 was encryption quality; it was purposely not. I did say that LC53 would be useful in games and simulations, which it is. I provided a lot of support code, such as both a rectangular and triangular distribution --- that would be very useful for games --- nobody says anything positive however, and instead I get called "stupid" by Bernd. You say this: On Saturday, November 23, 2013 at 9:25:28 AM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In the wikipedia entry about Linear congruential generators there > is an entry with a Forth implementation : LC53. > > There is no theoretical motivation or testresults behind it, > except a statement of Hugh Aguilar: > " invented it". > and > " > \ PRNG is not suitable for encryption; it is intended to be used in games and simulations. > " > > It has nothing to offer over the first generator mentioned (from > Numerical Recipees) : less trusted source, slower implementation, > smaller period. It has with a high probability, never been used in > a program with some notoriety. > > This may be a very poor generator, and it may reflect poorly on the > reputation of the Forth community. It may give a wrong impression about > the standing of Hugh's novice package in the Forth community. > > I ask Hugh to remove the LC53 from the wikipedia entry, until such > time he has more explanation on his website about the quality of the > generator. This is the prng provided in SwiftForth-v2 (written by Wil Baden): VARIABLE BUD : RAND ( -- u ) BUD @ 3141592621 * 1+ DUP BUD ! ; Why don't you criticize SwiftForth? Because you are a suck up! You criticize me and my LC53 because you know that you will get plenty of support from other suck ups, such as Bernd Paysan, who will call me "stupid." You don't criticize Forth Inc. though because you want to stay on the good side of Elizabeth Rather. That is just sycophant behavior. All in all, you are a really nasty piece of work. I would appreciate it if you never contact me again. Elizabeth Rather appreciates your brown-nosing quite a lot though: On Monday, November 25, 2013 at 10:24:00 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 11/25/13 9:32 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > ... > > I see that gForth as well as SwiftForth use a simple LCG. > > As far as I can see, they don't supply a reference, testset, testdata > > or other motivation. > > > > I fear neither of those fare too well on the harsh tests you use. > > Hugh suggests that the only difference with his LC53 is that > > Anton Ertl and Elizabeth Rather inspire more confidence than he does. > > Thank you, but I never wrote a random number generator and don't intend > to! I've been blessed by having some brilliant programmers around me. > But most of FORTH, Inc.'s customers aren't in fields where a strong RNG > is a necessity, so we keep it simple. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-29 01:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tKSdnUjNEPp9RF7KnZ2dnUU7-T2dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #50520 |
Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote: > > c.l.f would be a much duller place without WJ and HA. Possibly. However, it would be far more useful and pleasant. There's nothing to be gained arguing against imbecilic ranting: for an argument to be useful both sides have to have the possibility of some kind of reasonable point, even if one is wrong. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-29 00:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0670f6e6-94c0-4e08-9cf8-e57d68533965@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50540 |
On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 11:44:53 PM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: > Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote: > > > > c.l.f would be a much duller place without WJ and HA. > > Possibly. However, it would be far more useful and pleasant. There's > nothing to be gained arguing against imbecilic ranting: for an > argument to be useful both sides have to have the possibility of some > kind of reasonable point, even if one is wrong. > > Andrew. Andrew Haley is an employee of Forth Inc. --- and he is on the Forth-200x committee --- this is a blatant violation of the rule that no company is supposed to have more than one vote. Forth-200x is just a puppet of Forth Inc. --- it is "astro-turf," meaning a corporate marketing gimmick faked up to appear to be grassroots --- Andrew Haley believes that the only "reasonable point" is to just believe everything that his boss at Forth Inc. tells him to believe.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 14:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4ca2cd93-3d8a-4d6f-8fa5-c50b68bbf286@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50000 |
On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 11:54:21 AM UTC-7, Julian Fondren wrote:
> * Forth Inc. just wants you to buy SwiftForth.
> * SwiftForth comes with SWOOP , providing structures and more.
> * Forth Inc. are opposed to structures.
>
> Man it's really difficult sometimes to get your malicious
> characterizations to agree with your analyses of sinister plots.
SWOOP is only available under SwiftForth (hence the name), and SwiftForth costs money. Forth Inc. is opposed to structs (such as used in my novice package) because they are selling SWOOP as the only way to obtain structs.
Lets compare SWOOP with my novice-package method. Here is a super-simple example (no inheritance, no cloning, no pointers to other structs in the struct, etc.):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
marker swoop.4th
\ this is SWOOP
class point
variable x
variable y
: show ( -- ) x @ . y @ . ;
: dot ( -- ) ." Point at " show ;
end-class
: test ( -- )
point new >r
5 r@ using point x !
8 r@ using point y !
r@ using point dot
r@ using point destroy
rdrop ;
\ this is my method
0
w field .x
w field .y
constant pnt
: init-pnt ( x y node -- node )
>r
r@ .y !
r@ .x !
r> ;
: new-pnt ( x y -- node )
pnt alloc
init-pnt ;
: kill-pnt ( node -- )
dealloc ;
: show-pnt ( node -- )
>r
cr ." X: " r@ .x ?
cr ." Y: " r@ .y ?
rdrop ;
: my-test ( -- )
5 8 new-pnt >r
r@ show-pnt
r@ kill-pnt
rdrop ;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think my code is much more readable that the SWOOP code. Anybody using POINT in SWOOP is going to get tired of writing
USING POINT
The only problem with my method is that I don't have polymorphism. You can't have other structs with fields called .X and .Y etc.. This is easy to solve though --- just call your fields PNT.X and PNT.Y etc.. --- this bloats out the source-code somewhat (it is like USING POINT except not as bad), but it is reasonable in a large program that uses a lot of different structs.
Here is a start on disassembling MY-TEST:
see my-test
491CAF 8 # EBP SUB 83ED08
491CB2 EBX 4 [EBP] MOV 895D04
491CB5 5 # 0 [EBP] MOV C7450005000000
491CBC 8 # EBX MOV BB08000000
491CC1 491BEF ( new-pnt ) CALL E829FFFFFF
491CC6 EBX PUSH 53
491CC7 491C3F ( show-pnt ) CALL E873FFFFFF
491CCC 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
491CCF EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
491CD2 0 [ESP] EBX MOV 8B1C24
491CD5 480CDF ( dealloc ) CALL E805F0FEFF
491CDA EAX POP 58
491CDB RET C3 ok
see new-pnt
491BEF 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
491BF2 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
491BF5 8 # EBX MOV BB08000000
491BFA 480C8F ( alloc ) CALL E890F0FEFF
491BFF 491BAF ( init-pnt ) JMP E9ABFFFFFF ok
see init-pnt
491BAF EBX PUSH 53
491BB0 4 # EBX ADD 83C304
491BB3 0 [EBP] EAX MOV 8B4500
491BB6 EAX 0 [EBX] MOV 8903
491BB8 4 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D04
491BBB 8 # EBP ADD 83C508
491BBE 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
491BC1 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
491BC4 0 [ESP] EBX MOV 8B1C24
491BC7 0 [EBP] EAX MOV 8B4500
491BCA EAX 0 [EBX] MOV 8903
491BCC EBX POP 5B
491BCD 4 # EBP ADD 83C504
491BD0 RET C3 ok
I would estimate the speed of SWOOP to be one or two orders of magnitude slower than the speed of my code. Realistically, nobody is ever going to use SWOOP for any program in which speed matters at all. Using simple code such as I have in the novice-package, SwiftForth is about 1/4 the speed necessary for commercial programming and would only be usable for programs that don't really have any speed requirements (possibly those that spend all of their time waiting for user input).
Here is just a start on disassembling TEST however. I can't figure out what BROADCAST does because SEE can't find it, but it may be a whopper. I also can't figure out what the code in POINT does because SEE doesn't work on it either. I think my estimate of one or two orders of magnitude slower than my code is reasonable however.
see test
491A8F 49198F ( point ) CALL E8FBFEFFFF
491A94 426F9F ( NEW ) CALL E80655F9FF
491A99 EBX PUSH 53
491A9A 5 # EBX MOV BB05000000
491A9F 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
491AA2 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
491AA5 0 [ESP] EBX MOV 8B1C24
491AA8 0 [EBP] EAX MOV 8B4500
491AAB EAX 0 [EBX] MOV 8903
491AAD 4 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D04
491AB0 8 # EBP ADD 83C508
491AB3 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
491AB6 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
491AB9 8 # EBX MOV BB08000000
491ABE 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
491AC1 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
491AC4 0 [ESP] EBX MOV 8B1C24
491AC7 4 # EBX ADD 83C304
491ACA 0 [EBP] EAX MOV 8B4500
491ACD EAX 0 [EBX] MOV 8903
491ACF 4 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D04
491AD2 8 # EBP ADD 83C508
491AD5 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
491AD8 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
491ADB 0 [ESP] EBX MOV 8B1C24
491ADE A8 [ESI] PUSH FFB6A8000000
491AE4 EBX A8 [ESI] MOV 899EA8000000
491AEA 0 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D00
491AED 4 # EBP ADD 83C504
491AF0 A4 [ESI] PUSH FFB6A4000000
491AF6 8D98F # A4 [ESI] MOV C786A40000008FD90800
491B00 491A59 ( point +CA ) CALL E854FFFFFF
491B05 A4 [ESI] POP 8F86A4000000
491B0B A8 [ESI] POP 8F86A8000000
491B11 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
491B14 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
491B17 0 [ESP] EBX MOV 8B1C24
491B1A 42701F ( DESTROY ) CALL E80055F9FF
491B1F EAX POP 58
491B20 RET C3 ok
see new
426F9F 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
426FA2 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
426FA5 42585F ( SIZEOF ) CALL E8B5E8FFFF
426FAA 8 # EBX ADD 83C308
426FAD 40A15F ( ALLOCATE ) CALL E8AD31FEFF
426FB2 4054AF ( THROW ) CALL E8F8E4FDFF
426FB7 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
426FBA EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
426FBD 2159F # EBX MOV BB9F150200
426FC2 EBX EAX MOV 8BC3
426FC4 0 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D00
426FC7 4 # EBP ADD 83C504
426FCA EAX 0 [EBX] MOV 8903
426FCC 4 # EBX ADD 83C304
426FCF 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
426FD2 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
426FD5 4 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D04
426FD8 EBX EAX MOV 8BC3
426FDA 0 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D00
426FDD 4 # EBP ADD 83C504
426FE0 EAX 0 [EBX] MOV 8903
426FE2 4 # EBX ADD 83C304
426FE5 0 [EBP] EAX MOV 8B4500
426FE8 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
426FEB EBX 4 [EBP] MOV 895D04
426FEE EAX 0 [EBP] MOV 894500
426FF1 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
426FF4 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
426FF7 22CCF # EBX MOV BBCF2C0200
426FFC 426DBF ( BROADCAST ) JMP E9BEFDFFFF ok
see destroy
42701F 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
427022 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
427025 4 # EBX SUB 83EB04
427028 0 [EBX] EBX MOV 8B1B
42702A 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
42702D EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
427030 4 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D04
427033 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04
427036 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00
427039 22CEF # EBX MOV BBEF2C0200
42703E 426DBF ( BROADCAST ) CALL E87CFDFFFF
427043 4 # EBX SUB 83EB04
427046 4 # EBX SUB 83EB04
427049 40A19F ( FREE ) CALL E85131FEFF
42704E 4054AF ( THROW ) JMP E95CE4FDFF ok
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 15:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c929e07c-8210-42c0-b8a9-b11fab657afe@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50002 |
On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 2:56:19 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > Here is a start on disassembling MY-TEST: > > see my-test > 491CAF 8 # EBP SUB 83ED08 > 491CB2 EBX 4 [EBP] MOV 895D04 > 491CB5 5 # 0 [EBP] MOV C7450005000000 > 491CBC 8 # EBX MOV BB08000000 > 491CC1 491BEF ( new-pnt ) CALL E829FFFFFF > 491CC6 EBX PUSH 53 > 491CC7 491C3F ( show-pnt ) CALL E873FFFFFF > 491CCC 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04 > 491CCF EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00 > 491CD2 0 [ESP] EBX MOV 8B1C24 > 491CD5 480CDF ( dealloc ) CALL E805F0FEFF > 491CDA EAX POP 58 > 491CDB RET C3 ok > see new-pnt > 491BEF 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04 > 491BF2 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00 > 491BF5 8 # EBX MOV BB08000000 > 491BFA 480C8F ( alloc ) CALL E890F0FEFF > 491BFF 491BAF ( init-pnt ) JMP E9ABFFFFFF ok > see init-pnt > 491BAF EBX PUSH 53 > 491BB0 4 # EBX ADD 83C304 > 491BB3 0 [EBP] EAX MOV 8B4500 > 491BB6 EAX 0 [EBX] MOV 8903 > 491BB8 4 [EBP] EBX MOV 8B5D04 > 491BBB 8 # EBP ADD 83C508 > 491BBE 4 # EBP SUB 83ED04 > 491BC1 EBX 0 [EBP] MOV 895D00 > 491BC4 0 [ESP] EBX MOV 8B1C24 > 491BC7 0 [EBP] EAX MOV 8B4500 > 491BCA EAX 0 [EBX] MOV 8903 > 491BCC EBX POP 5B > 491BCD 4 # EBP ADD 83C504 > 491BD0 RET C3 ok > > I would estimate the speed of SWOOP to be one or two orders of magnitude slower than the speed of my code. Realistically, nobody is ever going to use SWOOP for any program in which speed matters at all. Using simple code such as I have in the novice-package, SwiftForth is about 1/4 the speed necessary for commercial programming and would only be usable for programs that don't really have any speed requirements (possibly those that spend all of their time waiting for user input). Here is MY-TEST disassembled in VFX: MY-TEST ( 004E4330 8D6DF4 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+-0C] ( 004E4333 C7450008000000 ) MOV DWord Ptr [EBP], 00000008 ( 004E433A C7450405000000 ) MOV DWord Ptr [EBP+04], 00000005 ( 004E4341 895D08 ) MOV [EBP+08], EBX ( 004E4344 BB08000000 ) MOV EBX, 00000008 ( 004E4349 E8E2B7FEFF ) CALL 004CFB30 ALLOC ( 004E434E 53 ) PUSH EBX ( 004E434F 8B5500 ) MOV EDX, [EBP] ( 004E4352 895304 ) MOV [EBX+04], EDX ( 004E4355 8B1C24 ) MOV EBX, [ESP] ( 004E4358 8B5504 ) MOV EDX, [EBP+04] ( 004E435B 8913 ) MOV 0 [EBX], EDX ( 004E435D 8B1C24 ) MOV EBX, [ESP] ( 004E4360 8D6D08 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+08] ( 004E4363 E858FFFFFF ) CALL 004E42C0 SHOW-PNT ( 004E4368 8B1424 ) MOV EDX, [ESP] ( 004E436B 8D6DFC ) LEA EBP, [EBP+-04] ( 004E436E 895D00 ) MOV [EBP], EBX ( 004E4371 8BDA ) MOV EBX, EDX ( 004E4373 E818B8FEFF ) CALL 004CFB90 DEALLOC ( 004E4378 8D642404 ) LEA ESP, [ESP+04] ( 004E437C C3 ) NEXT, ( 77 bytes, 22 instructions ) ok
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 22:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <57ae8058$0$292$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #50002 |
On 8/12/16 5:56 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 11:54:21 AM UTC-7, Julian Fondren wrote: >> * Forth Inc. just wants you to buy SwiftForth. >> * SwiftForth comes with SWOOP , providing structures and more. >> * Forth Inc. are opposed to structures. >> >> Man it's really difficult sometimes to get your malicious >> characterizations to agree with your analyses of sinister plots. > > SWOOP is only available under SwiftForth (hence the name), and SwiftForth costs money. Forth Inc. is opposed to structs (such as used in my novice package) because they are selling SWOOP as the only way to obtain structs. > > Lets compare SWOOP with my novice-package method. Here is a super-simple example (no inheritance, no cloning, no pointers to other structs in the struct, etc.): > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > marker swoop.4th > > \ this is SWOOP > > class point > variable x > variable y > : show ( -- ) x @ . y @ . ; > : dot ( -- ) ." Point at " show ; > end-class > > : test ( -- ) > point new >r > 5 r@ using point x ! > 8 r@ using point y ! > r@ using point dot > r@ using point destroy > rdrop ; > > \ this is my method > > 0 > w field .x > w field .y > constant pnt > > : init-pnt ( x y node -- node ) > >r > r@ .y ! > r@ .x ! > r> ; > > : new-pnt ( x y -- node ) > pnt alloc > init-pnt ; > > : kill-pnt ( node -- ) > dealloc ; > > : show-pnt ( node -- ) > >r > cr ." X: " r@ .x ? > cr ." Y: " r@ .y ? > rdrop ; > > : my-test ( -- ) > 5 8 new-pnt >r > r@ show-pnt > r@ kill-pnt > rdrop ; > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > I think my code is much more readable that the SWOOP code. Anybody > using POINT in SWOOP is going to get tired of writing USING POINT I don't know SWOOP very well. Is that really a requirement? > The only problem with my method is that I don't have polymorphism. > You can't have other structs with fields called .X and .Y etc.. That's right. A proper OOP package eliminates this issue. Also makes it easy to share code libraries. > This is > easy to solve though --- just call your fields PNT.X and PNT.Y etc.. --- > this bloats out the source-code somewhat (it is like USING POINT except > not as bad), but it is reasonable in a large program that uses a lot of > different structs. Maybe. There are other OOP extensions that do it differently. Here's one that uses Anton Ertl's*(see reference below) 2-instruction dynamic message send technique. I've an FMS derivative that uses it and it is used below. A good OOP package gives you more than just inheritance, polyporphism, dynamic binding, open recursion, and data namespace protection. But it seems everyone has their own ideas on that. Dynamic OOP will always carry some speed penalty. But it doesn't have to be large. See the disassembly of TEST below. On VFX: 100 value x :class point <super object cell bytes x cell bytes y :m init: ( x y -- ) y ! x ! ;m :m show x ? y ? ;m :m dot ." Point at " self show ;m ;class : test 5 8 point >heap \ init: is called implicitly dup dot <free ; test \ => Point at 5 8 x . \ => 100 \ no conflict with point's x see test ( 00087E70 8D6DF0 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+-10] ( 00087E73 C74500607B0800 ) MOV DWord Ptr [EBP], 00087B60 ( 00087E7A C7450408000000 ) MOV DWord Ptr [EBP+04], 00000008 ( 00087E81 C7450805000000 ) MOV DWord Ptr [EBP+08], 00000005 ( 00087E88 895D0C ) MOV [EBP+0C], EBX ( 00087E8B 8B1D647B0800 ) MOV EBX, [00087B64] ( 00087E91 FF15051F0200 ) CALL [00021F05] ALLOCATE ( 00087E97 E85078F9FF ) CALL 0001F6EC THROW ( 00087E9C 8B5500 ) MOV EDX, [EBP] ( 00087E9F 8B12 ) MOV EDX, 0 [EDX] ( 00087EA1 8913 ) MOV 0 [EBX], EDX ( 00087EA3 53 ) PUSH EBX ( 00087EA4 8B13 ) MOV EDX, 0 [EBX] ( 00087EA6 8D6D04 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+04] ( 00087EA9 FF5204 ) CALL [EDX+04] ( 00087EAC 5A ) POP EDX ( 00087EAD 8B0A ) MOV ECX, 0 [EDX] ( 00087EAF 8D6DF8 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+-08] ( 00087EB2 895500 ) MOV [EBP], EDX ( 00087EB5 895D04 ) MOV [EBP+04], EBX ( 00087EB8 8BDA ) MOV EBX, EDX ( 00087EBA FF5110 ) CALL [ECX+10] ( 00087EBD 8B13 ) MOV EDX, 0 [EBX] ( 00087EBF 8D6DFC ) LEA EBP, [EBP+-04] ( 00087EC2 895D00 ) MOV [EBP], EBX ( 00087EC5 FF5208 ) CALL [EDX+08] ( 00087EC8 FF15591F0200 ) CALL [00021F59] FREE ( 00087ECE E81978F9FF ) CALL 0001F6EC THROW ( 00087ED3 C3 ) NEXT, ( 100 bytes, 29 instructions ) -Doug *Methods in objects2: Duck Typing and Performance M. Anton Ertl 2012 EuroForth Conference
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lawrencedo99@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-12 21:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <50343a03-5565-4931-8025-1668726797c6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #50010 |
On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 2:05:15 PM UTC+12, Doug Hoffman wrote: > A good OOP package gives you more than just inheritance, polyporphism, > dynamic binding, open recursion, and data namespace protection. A good language will give you more than just OOP. Functions as first-class objects can be rather useful, too. For example, consider the “interpolator” and “draw procedure” mechanisms I created as part of anim_framework <https://github.com/ldo/anim_framework>. Here <https://github.com/ldo/anim_framework_examples/blob/master/anim_vimeo_2> is a non-trivial illustration of them in action.
[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