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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #40616 > unrolled thread

Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking

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

Contents

  Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 08:13 -0700
    Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 08:16 -0700
    Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-14 09:23 -0700
      Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 04:03 -0700
        Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2015-07-15 14:02 +0200
          Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-07-15 16:34 +0000
            Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2015-07-16 12:26 +0200
              Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-07-16 12:10 +0000
              Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Gary Bergstrom <forthprgrmr@gmail.com> - 2015-07-17 06:48 -0700
              Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-07-17 16:21 -0400
                Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2015-07-20 11:57 +0200
                  Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-07-20 12:37 +0000
                    Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Gary Bergstrom <forthprgrmr@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 10:42 -0700
                      Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-07-21 11:29 +0000
                    Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-20 11:48 -0700
                      Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-07-20 22:53 +0000
                        Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-21 00:32 -0700
                          Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-07-21 08:03 +0000
                            Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-21 01:33 -0700
                        Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-08-10 16:54 -0700
                    Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-07-21 05:18 +0000
                      Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-07-21 08:20 +0000
                  Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-07-20 12:09 -0400
                  Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2015-07-20 14:02 -0700
                    Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-21 15:03 -0700
                    Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-07-21 21:59 -0700
                    Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-08-03 23:30 +0200
                      Re: Arduino Due - small FORTH Computer - Multitasking JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2015-08-10 03:11 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#40720

stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) writes:
>On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 11:57:46 +0200, Matthias Koch
><matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> wrote:
>
>>I am a physicist and very curious on how it works internally.

You could look at http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/flk.1.3.tar.gz

>The internals are described in EuroForth papers.

Internals of VFX?  Which papers?

If you are interested in general papers about the "analytical" approach
to Forth native code compilation, you could start at
<http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/projects/rafts.html>

- 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 2015: http://www.mpeforth.com/euroforth2015/euroforth2015.htm

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

#40724

On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 05:18:55 GMT, anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at
(Anton Ertl) wrote:

>>The internals are described in EuroForth papers.
>
>Internals of VFX?  Which papers?

http://www.mpeforth.com/arena.htm

Stephen

-- 
Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com
MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691
web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads

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

#40712

On 20/07/2015 5:57 AM, Matthias Koch wrote:
 > I am a physicist and very curious on how it works internally. I simply
 > would not recommend VFX for the hobbyist or the one who wishes to play
 > with Forth internals. The in-target Lite compilers have their limits,
 > and a NDA is not the right choice for FOSS freaks.

Part of my question has been answered by Stephen Pelc. If your stated
purpose is personal education then NDA's would permit that. What an NDA
could do is retain control how the information gets further distributed
after its acquired.

I have owned a compiler company for many years, each new compiler
project sets a new record on development costs. The development has to
be completed before there is any chance of recovering the costs.

That model encourages high risk innovation.

After development it easy to duplicate innovation that works perhaps
1000:1 to 10000:1 less expensive.

I get several emails a month with the general comment that they like
FOSS price but we produce much better code. Why do we refuse to be
price competitive? The real answer is we probably are, it takes a day
or two engineering costs to pay for one of our compilers about 60% of
which on average is returned to the customer in the form of support the
remaining costs are similar or less than to install a FOSS compiler.

Most of our support calls are not fundamentally about our tools but
about how to develop code for the target environment.

w..

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

#40716

On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 10:56:24 AM UTC+1, Matthias Koch wrote:
> I am a physicist and very curious on how it works internally. I simply would not recommend VFX for the hobbyist or the one who wishes to play with Forth internals. The in-target Lite compilers have their limits, and a NDA is not the right choice for FOSS freaks. The original question has been about Arduino Due, so I assumed an experimental environment.
> 
> Matthias

Another very negative Forth post. Wanting all the internals for free - Want the IP without paying for it. 
Is this how physicists work? Along your lines I could not recommend Mecrisp, as it is a freebe and you cannot spend the time to support it professionally, as you are not paid for it  - or you do not have a job or you use your time at this job for maintaining your product?
Facts do not change except you are a genius.
I actually had many discussions with Stephen and in the end MPE agreed  to do the LITE versions. A slightly downgraded version from the professional products, but at least a fork from a professional product. And having started with it you can move easily to the more complex professional versions. Rather than starting with X and then change from 0 to a professional version.
AND HEY, NEXT WEEK up to 1024 scouts will somehow solder a MicroBox and play with VFX LITE programmed onto the MSP430 chips - not with one of the free versions where they, like  the physicist, might want to look at all the internal bits - and they would not be interested, except if they reach a higher level in Forth. Or even better if they like the Language.
Professional products need the money paid to survive. Otherwise Mecrisp might be the most professional level?
As you probably know better than I do,  there is not much professional product left in the Forth world.
If you are a good physicist and want to understand it all - write your own compiler as you did - is it for professional work,  hobbyists or just to play around with ? 
Define the target audience and then the product according to it.  
Sorry but you really stepped onto my toes with your post.

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

#40729

JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> writes:
> On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 10:56:24 AM UTC+1, Matthias Koch wrote:
>> I am a physicist and very curious on how it works internally. I
>> simply would not recommend VFX for the hobbyist or the one who
>> wishes to play with Forth internals. The in-target Lite compilers
>> have their limits, and a NDA is not the right choice for FOSS freaks.

> Another very negative Forth post. Wanting all the internals for free -
> Want the IP without paying for it.  Is this how physicists work?

I didn't see it as a negative post, and I do note that Matthias is
giving away Mecrisp.  I don't think he said anything bad about VFX or
asked anything from its vendor.  He suggested that a FOSS implementation
(like his) has advantages for certain types of users.  And he put the
work into writing such an implementation, which deserves respect.

> Along your lines I could not recommend Mecrisp, as it is a freebe and
> you cannot spend the time to support it professionally, as you are not
> paid for it

I would hope that Stephen has better things to do than offer unpaid
professional support to those 1024 Scouts who will be using the gratis
Lite product.  I'd also note that historically, the dominant Forth
implementation among hobbyists was probably FIGForth, which was free.
The commercial implementations were better but they weren't easily
affordable for non-professionals.  Forth would probably be dead today
rather than merely obscure, if FIGForth hadn't popularized it as it did.
If you used FIGForth yourself, you probably got something out of it.

Finally if I'm reading Stephen's posts correctly, the Lite resident
interpreter is actually distributed as source, which is great if it's
true, especially if it can be compiled with the Lite cross-compiler.
That means users can study and modify the interpreter, which is
important.

> 1024 scouts will somehow solder a MicroBox and play with VFX LITE
> programmed onto the MSP430 chips - not with one of the free versions
> where they, like the physicist, might want to look at all the internal
> bits - and they would not be interested, except if they reach a higher
> level in Forth. Or even better if they like the Language.

Time will tell, but you may be underestimating how interested these
Scouts are likely to be in seeing the internal bits.

> Professional products need the money paid to survive. Otherwise
> Mecrisp might be the most professional level?  As you probably know
> better than I do, there is not much professional product left in the
> Forth world.  If you are a good physicist and want to understand it
> all - write your own compiler as you did - is it for professional
> work, hobbyists or just to play around with ?  Define the target
> audience and then the product according to it. 

I think Rickman is trying to use Mecrisp professionally.  I'd certainly
count the 1024 scouts as mostly hobbyist-level rather than
professionals.  I myself have tried out a few different Linux desktop
Forths, and so far Gforth (which is free) is the one that works best for
me so far.  VFX and Swift have huge advantages for cross-development and
I'd definitely consider them if I got involved in an embedded Forth
project, but haven't felt the need so far.

I'll note that I got paid for a while to work on GCC, which is a free
compiler (non-Forth) used by many professionals.  As Stephen says, it's
just a different business model.

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

#40733

On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 5:02:36 PM UTC-4, JUERGEN wrote:
> On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 10:56:24 AM UTC+1, Matthias Koch wrote:
> > I am a physicist and very curious on how it works internally. I simply would not recommend VFX for the hobbyist or the one who wishes to play with Forth internals. The in-target Lite compilers have their limits, and a NDA is not the right choice for FOSS freaks. The original question has been about Arduino Due, so I assumed an experimental environment.
> > 
> > Matthias
> 
> Another very negative Forth post. Wanting all the internals for free - Want the IP without paying for it. 
> Is this how physicists work? Along your lines I could not recommend Mecrisp, as it is a freebe and you cannot spend the time to support it professionally, as you are not paid for it  - or you do not have a job or you use your time at this job for maintaining your product?
> Facts do not change except you are a genius.

Matthias is a genius!

DB.

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

#41080

JUERGEN wrote:

> On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 10:56:24 AM UTC+1, Matthias Koch wrote:
>> I am a physicist and very curious on how it works internally. I simply
>> would not recommend VFX for the hobbyist or the one who wishes to play
>> with Forth internals. The in-target Lite compilers have their limits, and
>> a NDA is not the right choice for FOSS freaks. The original question has
>> been about Arduino Due, so I assumed an experimental environment.
>> 
>> Matthias
> 
> Another very negative Forth post. Wanting all the internals for free -
> Want the IP without paying for it.

Jürgen, *every* scientist works like this.  Publish your stuff, don't hide 
it.  That's what has advanced science for the last 400 years (and during the 
greek era of science).

In any case: support is a very well-working business model for free 
software.  If you want the software including all sources and tinker with 
it, you get it.  If you want professional support, you pay for it.  That is 
a multi-billion dollar market now, free software support.

The downside of it is that if the incentive is to answer support questions, 
the code becomes more difficult to understand and tinker with it, and more 
buggy (because then you'll have more support questions).  GCC, the first 
free software program that was turned into such a support-oriented business, 
shows that setting a certain incentive makes the result predictable.  Pay 
for good support makes it more likely that the quality goes down.

I don't think you understand anything about free software.  First of all, it 
is *not* supposed to mean "free" as in "free beer".  That's just a side 
effect that when free software already exists, you can copy it for free.

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

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

#41255

On Monday, August 3, 2015 at 10:30:13 PM UTC+1, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> JUERGEN wrote:
> 
> > On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 10:56:24 AM UTC+1, Matthias Koch wrote:
> >> I am a physicist and very curious on how it works internally. I simply
> >> would not recommend VFX for the hobbyist or the one who wishes to play
> >> with Forth internals. The in-target Lite compilers have their limits, and
> >> a NDA is not the right choice for FOSS freaks. The original question has
> >> been about Arduino Due, so I assumed an experimental environment.
> >> 
> >> Matthias
> > 
> > Another very negative Forth post. Wanting all the internals for free -
> > Want the IP without paying for it.
> 
> Jürgen, *every* scientist works like this.  Publish your stuff, don't hide 
> it.  That's what has advanced science for the last 400 years (and during the 
> greek era of science).
> 
> In any case: support is a very well-working business model for free 
> software.  If you want the software including all sources and tinker with 
> it, you get it.  If you want professional support, you pay for it.  That is 
> a multi-billion dollar market now, free software support.
> 
> The downside of it is that if the incentive is to answer support questions, 
> the code becomes more difficult to understand and tinker with it, and more 
> buggy (because then you'll have more support questions).  GCC, the first 
> free software program that was turned into such a support-oriented business, 
> shows that setting a certain incentive makes the result predictable.  Pay 
> for good support makes it more likely that the quality goes down.
> 
> I don't think you understand anything about free software.  First of all, it 
> is *not* supposed to mean "free" as in "free beer".  That's just a side 
> effect that when free software already exists, you can copy it for free.
> 
> -- 
> Bernd Paysan
> "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
> net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
> http://bernd-paysan.de/

Bernd, if you want to lecture me, do it on a private basis you do have my email. This would be appreciated. Here on this forum it looks pretty arrogant and I do not appreciate it. 
I have made my point and I stick to it. There is no NDA with VFX LITE. If this is not good enough, I assume there was never a communication of getting access to more of VFX for a scientific project. At least I am not aware of it. 
So my opinion about negative is correct. Actually I have to correct myself, a negative comment about MPE which does not hold water.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

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

csiph-web