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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #49539 > unrolled thread

how can forth compete with lisp

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

Contents

  how can forth compete with lisp endlessboomcapitalism@gmail.com - 2016-07-26 09:43 -0700
    Re: how can forth compete with lisp mentificium@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 05:40 -0700
      Re: how can forth compete with lisp mister35mm@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 12:18 -0700
    Re: how can forth compete with lisp endlessboomcapitalism@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 10:01 -0700
      Re: how can forth compete with lisp Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 10:24 -0700
        Re: how can forth compete with lisp JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-08-13 11:25 -0700
          Re: how can forth compete with lisp foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-08-13 11:47 -0700
            Re: how can forth compete with lisp JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-08-13 12:17 -0700
            Re: how can forth compete with lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-13 12:40 -0700
              Re: how can forth compete with lisp JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-08-13 13:08 -0700
                Re: how can forth compete with lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-13 13:58 -0700
                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-08-14 00:32 -0700
                    Re: how can forth compete with lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-18 16:11 -0700
                      Re: how can forth compete with lisp JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-08-19 06:45 -0700
                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-20 00:41 +0000
                    Re: how can forth compete with lisp rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 12:26 -0400
                    Re: how can forth compete with lisp Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 18:17 -0700
                Re: how can forth compete with lisp Bill Zimmerly <billzimmerly@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 21:19 -0700
                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp Bill Zimmerly <billzimmerly@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 22:40 -0700
                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-09-16 09:03 +0000
                    Re: how can forth compete with lisp JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-09-16 10:00 -0700
                    Re: how can forth compete with lisp Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-09-24 21:27 +0000
                      Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 17:23 -0700
        Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 15:55 -0700
          Re: how can forth compete with lisp lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-09-23 18:39 -0700
            Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 20:20 -0700
            Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-23 18:46 -1000
              Re: how can forth compete with lisp lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-09-23 22:16 -0700
                Re: how can forth compete with lisp Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 22:40 -0700
                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 00:07 -0700
                Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 00:11 -0700
                Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 00:13 -0700
                Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-23 21:15 -1000
                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-09-24 00:47 -0700
                    Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-23 22:18 -1000
                      Re: how can forth compete with lisp lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-09-24 19:26 -0700
                        Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-24 21:30 -1000
                          Re: how can forth compete with lisp lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-09-25 13:53 -0700
                            Re: how can forth compete with lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-25 13:59 -0700
                              Re: how can forth compete with lisp lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-09-25 17:38 -0700
                                Re: how can forth compete with lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-25 17:54 -0700
                              Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-25 14:43 -1000
                                Re: how can forth compete with lisp jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-09-26 14:53 +0100
                                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-26 14:02 -1000
                                    Re: how can forth compete with lisp jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-09-27 11:16 +0100
                                      Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-27 10:28 -1000
                                        Re: how can forth compete with lisp jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-09-28 11:41 +0100
                                          Re: how can forth compete with lisp albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-09-28 13:27 +0200
                                            Re: how can forth compete with lisp foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 08:05 -0700
                                              Re: how can forth compete with lisp Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-09-28 11:40 -0500
                                                Re: how can forth compete with lisp foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 10:13 -0700
                                              Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-28 08:39 -1000
                                              Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 18:14 -0700
                                          Re: how can forth compete with lisp stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-09-28 11:33 +0000
                                            Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 18:12 -0700
                                          Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-28 08:35 -1000
                                            Re: how can forth compete with lisp foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-09-29 06:59 -0700
                                              Re: how can forth compete with lisp "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-09-29 09:43 -1000
                                                Re: how can forth compete with lisp stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-09-30 09:39 +0000
                                                Re: how can forth compete with lisp lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-09-30 16:54 -0700
                                                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-30 17:14 -0700
                                                  Re: how can forth compete with lisp albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-01 11:06 +0200
                                                    Re: how can forth compete with lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-01 12:20 -0700
                                                      Re: how can forth compete with lisp albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-02 02:04 +0200
                                                        Re: how can forth compete with lisp Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-01 17:00 -0700
                                          Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 17:28 -0700
                                        Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 17:27 -0700
                        Re: how can forth compete with lisp dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2016-10-01 13:12 +0000
                          Re: how can forth compete with lisp albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-01 16:07 +0200
                            Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 18:33 -0700
                          Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 18:23 -0700
                          Re: how can forth compete with lisp lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 18:45 -0700
                        Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 17:24 -0700
              Re: how can forth compete with lisp polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 00:08 -0700
    Re: how can forth compete with lisp Bill Zimmerly <billzimmerly@gmail.com> - 2016-09-17 07:18 -0700

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#49539 — how can forth compete with lisp

lisp seems to have better abstraction!

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#49558

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 9:43:45 AM UTC-7, endlessboo...@gmail.com wrote:
> lisp seems to have better abstraction!

Lisp never seems to get around to creating True AI; 
whereas Forth has been at the forefront of True AI 
for 20 years, since Sgt. Pepper told the band to play. 

In 2016 I have been porting the MindForth AI into Perl. 

http://github.com/PriorArt/AGI was created on 13 July 2016. 

http://github.com/PriorArt/AGI/blob/master/ghost.pl 

is a Perl AI which I am porting back into Win32Forth. 

http://github.com/PriorArt/AGI/wiki/MindGrid 

graphically shows a kind of AI breakthrough, 
where the AI Mind can learn and remember things 
about itself and engage in self-referential thought. 

For me it was very frustrating to achieve the 
AI breakthrough in Perl and not in Forth, 
because self-knowledge by the AI verges on 
artificial consciousness, but the Perl AI 
needs to stop after every AI thought and 
wait for human input. Not so in Forth all-mighty! 

http://ai.neocities.org/forthagi.txt 

is where I have just now, during this posting, 
uploaded the incipient new Forth AGI code so 
that our beloved community of gentlemanly and 
one lady-like Forth coders may view the new 
Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) program. 

Bye for now,

Mentifex (Arthur) 
-- 
http://ai.neocities.org/AiSteps.html 
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GX2B8F0 
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=307824.307853 
http://www.advogato.org/person/mentifex/diary/101.html 

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

#51551

I am interested in FORTH, which is why I am in a FORTH GROUP.

So, not only, can you not understand what the topic of this group is, but you ALSO, cannot count as Beatles Sgt Pepper was released in 1967, an lot more than 20 years ago. 

Perhaps you might develop some intelligence, and discuss it SOMEWHERE ELSE.

For anyone else who's interested in discussing FORTH, and ONLY, F-O-R-T-H, there is a very lively FORTH PROGRAMMING group on Facebook, where there is ZERO tolerance TROLLing and SPAM.



> Lisp never seems to get around to creating True AI; 
> whereas Forth has been at the forefront of True AI 
> for 20 years, since Sgt. Pepper told the band to play. 

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

#50049

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:43:45 PM UTC-4, endlessboo...@gmail.com wrote:
> lisp seems to have better abstraction!

silence here

uh oh

is lisp better?

I wonder sometimes.

Which is best?

let over lambda book says lisp is ultimate programming lang

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

#50051

El sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016, 14:01:56 (UTC-3), endlessboo...@gmail.com  escribió:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:43:45 PM UTC-4, endlessboo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > lisp seems to have better abstraction!
> 
> silence here
> 
> uh oh
> 
> is lisp better?
> 
> I wonder sometimes.
> 
> Which is best?
> 
> let over lambda book says lisp is ultimate programming lang

a languague not make a program, a programer do

not have sense talk about diferent programing languagues, the only important thing is know how resolve a problem, not the tool.

you not like forth, ok, move to other group.

You have a question about forth?, then ask here,if you have luck some respond.

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

#50052

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 6:24:26 PM UTC+1, Pablo Hugo Reda wrote:
> El sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016, 14:01:56 (UTC-3), endlessboo...@gmail.com  escribió:
> > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:43:45 PM UTC-4, endlessboo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > lisp seems to have better abstraction!
> > 
> > silence here
> > 
> > uh oh
> > 
> > is lisp better?
> > 
> > I wonder sometimes.
> > 
> > Which is best?
> > 
> > let over lambda book says lisp is ultimate programming lang
> 
> a languague not make a program, a programer do
> 
> not have sense talk about diferent programing languagues, the only important thing is know how resolve a problem, not the tool.
> 
> you not like forth, ok, move to other group.
> 
> You have a question about forth?, then ask here,if you have luck some respond.

Thanks Pablo, brilliant answer. 
It seems so simple: Forth Group Forth Questions Forth Answers.
If you are a hammer everything looks like a nail.
Sometimnes works sometimes not.

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

#50055

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 2:25:43 PM UTC-4, JUERGEN wrote:
> On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 6:24:26 PM UTC+1, Pablo Hugo Reda wrote:
> > El sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016, 14:01:56 (UTC-3), endlessboo...@gmail.com  escribió:
> > > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:43:45 PM UTC-4, endlessboo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > lisp seems to have better abstraction!
> > > 
> > > silence here
> > > 
> > > uh oh
> > > 
> > > is lisp better?
> > > 
> > > I wonder sometimes.
> > > 
> > > Which is best?
> > > 
> > > let over lambda book says lisp is ultimate programming lang
> > 
> > a languague not make a program, a programer do
> > 
> > not have sense talk about diferent programing languagues, the only important thing is know how resolve a problem, not the tool.
> > 
> > you not like forth, ok, move to other group.
> > 
> > You have a question about forth?, then ask here,if you have luck some respond.
> 
> Thanks Pablo, brilliant answer. 
> It seems so simple: Forth Group Forth Questions Forth Answers.
> If you are a hammer everything looks like a nail.
> Sometimnes works sometimes not.

From anecdotes I read many years ago (Byte magazine maybe?) LISP has been 
responsible for some successes much like Forth has been. The interactive
environment allows high productivity and the ability to extend language is
similar to Forth and arguably you begin the extending at a higher level.

So Pablo's answer is correct. Pick the tool for the job.

I would like to add that the things that make LISP a good tool are mirrored in 
 many ways in Forth.  Forth being the better choice if close to hardware access
 is required IMHO.

I also find it remarkable that many modern languages have ignored the
interactive paradigm despite the productivity gains it seems to bring.

Micro Python might be an exception however.

BF

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

#50058

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 7:47:34 PM UTC+1, foxaudio...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 2:25:43 PM UTC-4, JUERGEN wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 6:24:26 PM UTC+1, Pablo Hugo Reda wrote:
> > > El sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016, 14:01:56 (UTC-3), endlessboo...@gmail.com  escribió:
> > > > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:43:45 PM UTC-4, endlessboo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > lisp seems to have better abstraction!
> > > > 
> > > > silence here
> > > > 
> > > > uh oh
> > > > 
> > > > is lisp better?
> > > > 
> > > > I wonder sometimes.
> > > > 
> > > > Which is best?
> > > > 
> > > > let over lambda book says lisp is ultimate programming lang
> > > 
> > > a languague not make a program, a programer do
> > > 
> > > not have sense talk about diferent programing languagues, the only important thing is know how resolve a problem, not the tool.
> > > 
> > > you not like forth, ok, move to other group.
> > > 
> > > You have a question about forth?, then ask here,if you have luck some respond.
> > 
> > Thanks Pablo, brilliant answer. 
> > It seems so simple: Forth Group Forth Questions Forth Answers.
> > If you are a hammer everything looks like a nail.
> > Sometimnes works sometimes not.
> 
> From anecdotes I read many years ago (Byte magazine maybe?) LISP has been 
> responsible for some successes much like Forth has been. The interactive
> environment allows high productivity and the ability to extend language is
> similar to Forth and arguably you begin the extending at a higher level.
> 
> So Pablo's answer is correct. Pick the tool for the job.
> 
> I would like to add that the things that make LISP a good tool are mirrored in 
>  many ways in Forth.  Forth being the better choice if close to hardware access
>  is required IMHO.
> 
> I also find it remarkable that many modern languages have ignored the
> interactive paradigm despite the productivity gains it seems to bring.
> 
> Micro Python might be an exception however.
> 
> BF

All languages have their plusses and minusses - and are optimized for certain applications - otherwise they would not exist. 
The only exception it seems is Forth, as there is no predefined box - write your own compiler in an afternoon as it is said. 
There are assemblers per processor
Forth goes one level up and adds an environment  - at least MPE and Forth INC do.
Libraries that make it easier to speed up designs seem to be required to add another level.
Large applications have done it for their requirements  but an SLI - a Standard Library Interface would help - and here I exclude the people who want it their own way.
It seems that MPE offers one way to add existing C Libraries to Forth using SockPuppet. 
Only if there is a market - means Money there will be Forth Libraries - please correct me if I am wrong.

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

#50066

foxaudioresearch@gmail.com writes:
> Micro Python might be an exception however.

Regular Python is also interactive.  

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

#50067

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 8:40:01 PM UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote:
> foxaudioresearch@gmail.com writes:
> > Micro Python might be an exception however.
> 
> Regular Python is also interactive.

Thanks Paul, I will have to get the basics then. 
In another thread I started, I tried to find a basic Forth under  MicroPython

As Bernd said:
Minimum Word Set 
How many primitives does a Forth need to get started? 
Surprisingly few, as you can see with Gforth EC, 
which provides a high-level definition for almost every primitive. 
But beware! If you omit too much, you risk circular behaviour (loops). 
We need in any case: 
:dodoes as generalized entry point for all high-level definitions, or 
Call for primitive-centric implementations. 
@ and ! to access the memory. 
>R and 
R> for the return stack, so anything can be moved. 
+ or 
2* for Artihmetik. And 
NAND as a universal bit instruction. 
?BRANCH or 
0= for branches. And finally 
;S and 
EXECUTE for execution. 
Everything else can be defined from these words, even if it then needs temporary variables: 
: lit' r> @ ; 
: cell lit' [ 2 , ] ; \ oder 4 oder 8 ... 
: tmp1 lit' [ here cell+ , 0 , ] ; 
: dup tmp1 ! tmp1 @ tmp1 @ ; 
: lit r> dup cell + >r @ ; 
By Bernd Paysan 

Having this in MicroPython should allow to have a complete GFORTH run under MicroPython.
How effective - is it fast enough to play with is my question?
Faster just needs either dev. time or HW cost and the usage will dictate it.

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

#50070

JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> writes:
> In another thread I started, I tried to find a basic Forth under
> MicroPython

I sort of remember that, but I don't see any point in implementing Forth
in Python.  The idea of Forth is to get an interactive language from
very little machine resources, that is capable of realtime operation,
and is pretty fast for an interpreted language and that can also be made
very fast with an optimizing compiler.  The cost of this is quite a bit
of programmer inconvenience in dealing with the stack, memory
management, lack of compiler and runtime automatic error checking, etc.

Python has lots of such conveniences, but the cost is that it's much
slower than Forth, uses much more memory, is not realtime (uses
automatic storage reclamation or garbage collection), etc.  By
implementing Forth in Python, you get both the inconvenience and the
high resource consumption and slow speed.

> Having this in MicroPython should allow to have a complete GFORTH run
> under MicroPython.

Gforth is written in C and you have to compile it with a C compiler.
Python doesn't come into it.  In principle you could write a Forth in
Python but there's little to be gained from that.

> How effective - is it fast enough to play with is my question?

MicroPython is more than fast enough to play with.  Maybe it's 10x
slower than Forth on the same hardware.  On the other hand, current
hardware at least 100x faster than the 1980s computers from Forth's
heyday, so if you're used to running Forth on those, Python will seem
10x faster, if that makes any sense.

If you implemented Forth in Python straightforwardly, maybe you'd get a
10x slowdown, so you're back to the original speed of Forth on old
computers.

If you type "Maple Mini" into ebay, you should see lots of cheap boards
(like 5 euros or less) with the old Leaf design, which is a Cortex M3
with 128k of flash and 20k of ram, at something like 80 mhz.  That
should be enough to run small Micropython programs, though you probably
want more ram for bigger programs.

The Micropython PyBoard is much nicer and comes with Micropython already
installed, though it's fairly expensive (45 USD over here).  You can
play with one online, typing Micropython commands into your browser to
watch the board control a servo and some leds:

   http://micropython.org/live/

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

#50080

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 9:58:18 PM UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote:
> JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> writes:
> > In another thread I started, I tried to find a basic Forth under
> > MicroPython
> 
> I sort of remember that, but I don't see any point in implementing Forth
> in Python.  The idea of Forth is to get an interactive language from
> very little machine resources, that is capable of realtime operation,
> and is pretty fast for an interpreted language and that can also be made
> very fast with an optimizing compiler.  The cost of this is quite a bit
> of programmer inconvenience in dealing with the stack, memory
> management, lack of compiler and runtime automatic error checking, etc.
> 
> Python has lots of such conveniences, but the cost is that it's much
> slower than Forth, uses much more memory, is not realtime (uses
> automatic storage reclamation or garbage collection), etc.  By
> implementing Forth in Python, you get both the inconvenience and the
> high resource consumption and slow speed.
> 
> > Having this in MicroPython should allow to have a complete GFORTH run
> > under MicroPython.
> 
> Gforth is written in C and you have to compile it with a C compiler.
> Python doesn't come into it.  In principle you could write a Forth in
> Python but there's little to be gained from that.
> 
> > How effective - is it fast enough to play with is my question?
> 
> MicroPython is more than fast enough to play with.  Maybe it's 10x
> slower than Forth on the same hardware.  On the other hand, current
> hardware at least 100x faster than the 1980s computers from Forth's
> heyday, so if you're used to running Forth on those, Python will seem
> 10x faster, if that makes any sense.
> 
> If you implemented Forth in Python straightforwardly, maybe you'd get a
> 10x slowdown, so you're back to the original speed of Forth on old
> computers.
> 
> If you type "Maple Mini" into ebay, you should see lots of cheap boards
> (like 5 euros or less) with the old Leaf design, which is a Cortex M3
> with 128k of flash and 20k of ram, at something like 80 mhz.  That
> should be enough to run small Micropython programs, though you probably
> want more ram for bigger programs.
> 
> The Micropython PyBoard is much nicer and comes with Micropython already
> installed, though it's fairly expensive (45 USD over here).  You can
> play with one online, typing Micropython commands into your browser to
> watch the board control a servo and some leds:
> 
>    http://micropython.org/live/

Thanks Paul. 
I was hoping there would be a way to use this minimum word set and the rest on top would be in Forth - eForth I think uses 32. 
I  wonder when Forth will be online with the same or similar HW to play with it. 
Even just a SW version.
Just the usual excuse: Here it is educational and understanding only - speed is not, cost is of high importance. If then interested - there are loads of other and better resources but the first steps done and hooked?

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

#50225

JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> writes:
>>    http://micropython.org/live/
> I wonder when Forth will be online with the same or similar HW to play
> with it.  Even just a SW version.

There's a browser-based javascript one here:

   https://brendanator.github.io/jsForth/

For a while Mikael Nordman (iirc) had some small embedded boards running
Flashforth online so people could telnet into them and play with them.
But they didn't have webcams.

Maybe you are elected!

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

#50249

On Friday, August 19, 2016 at 12:11:54 AM UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote:
> JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> writes:
> >>    http://micropython.org/live/
> > I wonder when Forth will be online with the same or similar HW to play
> > with it.  Even just a SW version.
> 
> There's a browser-based javascript one here:
> 
>    https://brendanator.github.io/jsForth/
> 
> For a while Mikael Nordman (iirc) had some small embedded boards running
> Flashforth online so people could telnet into them and play with them.
> But they didn't have webcams.
> 
> Maybe you are elected!

.s    -> word not defined
words -> word not defined 
this is when I stopped

Forth online 2001  from 15 years ago -> http://forth.org/svfig/online.html
It seems there is little interest from the Forth and from the User side for such an application - but there is VFX on my PC which does what I need.

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

#50266

Paul Rubin wrote:

> JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> writes:
> > In another thread I started, I tried to find a basic Forth under
> > MicroPython
> 
> I sort of remember that, but I don't see any point in implementing Forth
> in Python.

The point is that worshippers of ANS Forth are incapable of learning
another language, such as Python or Ruby or OCaml.

A "mind" that is incapable of learning isn't much of a mind.

They stick with a stone-age language because they are bone-headed.

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

#50279

On 8/19/2016 8:41 PM, WJ wrote:
> Paul Rubin wrote:
>
>> JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> writes:
>>> In another thread I started, I tried to find a basic Forth under
>>> MicroPython
>>
>> I sort of remember that, but I don't see any point in implementing Forth
>> in Python.
>
> The point is that worshippers of ANS Forth are incapable of learning
> another language, such as Python or Ruby or OCaml.
>
> A "mind" that is incapable of learning isn't much of a mind.
>
> They stick with a stone-age language because they are bone-headed.

It's always lovely to hear from you WJ.  Thanks for your contribution. 
I'm sure everyone appreciates your efforts and patience with the rest of 
us.

-- 

Rick C

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

#50372

El viernes, 19 de agosto de 2016, 21:41:09 (UTC-3), WJ  escribió:
> Paul Rubin wrote:
> 
> > JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> writes:
> > > In another thread I started, I tried to find a basic Forth under
> > > MicroPython
> > 
> > I sort of remember that, but I don't see any point in implementing Forth
> > in Python.
> 
> The point is that worshippers of ANS Forth are incapable of learning
> another language, such as Python or Ruby or OCaml.
> 
> A "mind" that is incapable of learning isn't much of a mind.
> 
> They stick with a stone-age language because they are bone-headed.


It's always lovely to hear from you WJ. Thanks for your contribution. 
I'm sure everyone know about you limitation in forth coding.
Get a better job, make cakes, you can be happy too.

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

#51018

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 3:08:38 PM UTC-5, JUERGEN wrote:
> As Bernd said:
> Minimum Word Set 
> How many primitives does a Forth need to get started? 
> Surprisingly few, as you can see with Gforth EC, 
> which provides a high-level definition for almost every primitive. 

JUERGEN, what is "Gforth EC?"

Thanks in advance,
- Bill

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

#51019

Ah! I think I found it ... EC stands for "Embedded Controller."

On Thursday, September 15, 2016 at 11:19:05 PM UTC-5, Bill Zimmerly wrote:
> On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 3:08:38 PM UTC-5, JUERGEN wrote:
> > As Bernd said:
> > Minimum Word Set 
> > How many primitives does a Forth need to get started? 
> > Surprisingly few, as you can see with Gforth EC, 
> > which provides a high-level definition for almost every primitive. 
> 
> JUERGEN, what is "Gforth EC?"
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> - Bill

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

#51029

Bill Zimmerly <billzimmerly@gmail.com> writes:
>On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 3:08:38 PM UTC-5, JUERGEN wrote:
>> As Bernd said:
>> Minimum Word Set 
>> How many primitives does a Forth need to get started? 
>> Surprisingly few, as you can see with Gforth EC, 
>> which provides a high-level definition for almost every primitive. 
>
>JUERGEN, what is "Gforth EC?"

It's the embedded control variant of Gforth.  It uses primitives
written in assembly, primitive replacements written in Forth, and for
the rest of the system there are lots of options to disable things
that rely on stuff that is only available on bigger platforms.  It is
also mostly undocumented, and much of the documentation that exists is
in German, in particular
<http://wiki.forth-ev.de/doku.php/projects:r8c:r8c_forth>.

- 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]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

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

csiph-web