Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #19527 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-02-07 22:51 +0100 |
| Last post | 2013-02-10 00:06 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 144 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-07 22:51 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? "Paul E. Bennett" <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2013-02-07 22:08 +0000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? AKE <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 14:32 -0800
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-07 23:40 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? AKE <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 17:06 -0800
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? AKE <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 17:07 -0800
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 14:36 -0800
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-07 23:46 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-07 16:38 -1000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 10:22 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-02-08 10:26 +0000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-07 12:50 -1000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 00:15 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2013-02-08 14:51 -0600
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 22:02 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 18:21 -0500
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 00:30 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 00:39 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 18:51 -0500
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 12:28 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-08 12:25 +0000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 22:04 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-09 15:27 +0000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-09 16:36 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 05:01 -0800
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 21:58 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2013-02-08 10:08 -0500
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2013-02-08 10:11 -0500
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 22:05 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 08:29 -0800
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 18:48 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 17:20 -0500
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-08 23:32 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 23:57 -0500
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-08 15:02 -1000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-09 02:24 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-08 15:58 -1000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-09 16:43 +0100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-09 10:03 -1000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2013-02-10 11:35 +1100
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 23:48 -0800
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-09 16:37 +0100
OT: ANS Forth Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-09 17:27 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-09 10:06 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-09 12:26 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-09 14:38 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2013-02-22 12:52 -0500
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-22 09:25 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-10 08:15 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-10 23:34 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2013-02-11 22:14 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-11 13:34 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2013-02-11 11:52 +1100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-10 17:11 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-10 22:06 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Charles Childers" <crc@retroforth.org> - 2013-02-11 17:17 -0500
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2013-02-13 11:42 +1100
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-12 16:07 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2013-02-15 09:42 +1100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2013-02-15 00:16 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2013-02-17 16:05 +1100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-02-17 04:16 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-17 13:12 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-02-17 09:15 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2013-02-19 09:35 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andy Valencia <user@vsta.org> - 2013-02-19 19:25 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-19 15:35 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-21 00:37 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-20 23:07 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-21 01:38 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-21 08:50 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 15:44 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-24 03:41 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 20:00 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2013-02-24 13:49 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-24 15:04 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-24 14:52 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-24 23:51 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-24 16:23 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-21 03:55 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2013-02-22 13:01 -0500
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-22 12:26 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andy Valencia <user@vsta.org> - 2013-02-19 21:54 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-19 18:21 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2013-02-20 08:45 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-20 11:01 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-20 11:25 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-21 00:22 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-20 22:50 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-21 01:08 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-21 12:42 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-21 13:50 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-21 09:36 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-22 01:32 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 00:50 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-24 03:03 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2013-02-21 09:12 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 00:38 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-21 09:01 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2013-02-22 00:05 +0200
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-21 13:24 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-21 09:33 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-21 13:04 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-22 01:41 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 00:31 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Paul E. Bennett" <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2013-02-23 09:15 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-23 04:33 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-23 13:49 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2013-02-23 13:35 -0500
Re: OT: ANS Forth Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2013-02-23 13:46 -0500
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 15:26 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2013-02-24 09:41 -0500
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-21 09:09 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 00:37 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-23 13:57 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-02-23 08:47 -1000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-22 01:27 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 00:16 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-23 04:36 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-02-23 16:52 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-23 12:39 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-02-25 16:27 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2013-02-23 18:08 -0500
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-24 02:20 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-02-24 20:16 -0800
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-25 16:04 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-25 17:12 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-25 20:44 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-25 16:45 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andy Valencia <user@vsta.org> - 2013-02-24 02:09 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-24 04:03 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-02-25 17:58 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-02-25 20:57 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-02 16:43 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-03-02 18:14 +0100
Re: OT: ANS Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-03-03 13:56 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-24 03:45 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-13 04:12 -0600
Re: OT: ANS Forth stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2013-02-13 12:24 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-02-11 14:41 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth Andy Valencia <user@vsta.org> - 2013-02-11 19:44 +0000
Re: OT: ANS Forth albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-02-11 21:14 +0000
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-02-09 18:14 -0600
Re: 3D-graphics calculations using integers? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-02-10 00:06 -0500
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-08 23:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <fbec13db-004e-4455-b68b-28b1669e2310@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #19565 |
On Saturday, February 9, 2013 3:24:39 AM UTC+2, Zbiggy wrote: > > Maybe for the very beginning I'll take something simpler, just to observe on > > easier example, how it works, instead of speculating. > > -- > It's us, the scobs. Hi! You could look at isforth from www.isforth.com. Unpack and go src/examples/dots. Have a nice day, humptydumpty
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-09 16:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkhcurr.app.zbigniew2011REMOVE@Tichy.myhome.org> |
| In reply to | #19570 |
In comp.lang.forth, humptydumpty wrote: > You could look at isforth from www.isforth.com. > Unpack and go src/examples/dots. > > Have a nice day, > humptydumpty Indeed: interesting "compact" Forth implementation. Must take a closer look. -- It's us, the scobs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-09 17:27 +0100 |
| Subject | OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <slrnkhd1pg.cbe.zbigniew2011REMOVE@Tichy.myhome.org> |
| In reply to | #19581 |
Actually, on IsForth doc-pages I've found an interesting quote: "The ans Forth standard does NOT describe the Forth language but a language of the same name" (Chuck Moore) What was rationale for such statement? Did Mr. Moore say more about this? -- It's us, the scobs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-09 10:06 -1000 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <ubedncGvadPJMYvMnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #19584 |
On 2/9/13 6:27 AM, Zbiggy wrote: > Actually, on IsForth doc-pages I've found an interesting quote: > > "The ans Forth standard does NOT describe the Forth language but a language > of the same name" (Chuck Moore) > > What was rationale for such statement? Did Mr. Moore say more about this? > Chuck sails under his own flag, so to speak, and has no use for standards. To him, "Forth" is what he's doing right now, which may or may not resemble what he did last year, or what anyone else wants to do. Geniuses are often like that. It's a statement that succinctly describes his relationship to all the rest of us who are trying to promote Forth and therefore need standards. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-09 12:26 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <7xobftcjye.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #19588 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: > all the rest of us who are trying to > promote Forth and therefore need standards. I think C benefitted from having a standard, and Ada and Cobol would have been diminished enormously without standards. Lisp on the other hand may have been damaged by standardization (Common Lisp). Forth may be more spiritually aligned with Lisp than it is with C or Cobol. So it's not so clear to me that the ANS opponents aren't onto something. Retroforth (retroforth.org) despite its name, looks relatively clean and modern compared to ANS Forth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-09 14:38 -1000 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <9dCdnXnED5-IcYvMnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #19589 |
On 2/9/2013 10:26 AM, Paul Rubin wrote: > "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> all the rest of us who are trying to >> promote Forth and therefore need standards. > > I think C benefitted from having a standard, and Ada and Cobol would > have been diminished enormously without standards. Lisp on the other > hand may have been damaged by standardization (Common Lisp). Forth may > be more spiritually aligned with Lisp than it is with C or Cobol. So > it's not so clear to me that the ANS opponents aren't onto something. > Retroforth (retroforth.org) despite its name, looks relatively clean > and modern compared to ANS Forth. It depend on what your objectives are. If you want to use the language in significant applications, your customers are going to want a standards-compliant implementation with a large customer base. If you're looking for something Chuck would sign on for, it certainly isn't Retroforth, as it targets a portable virtual machine (Chuck has always insisted on bare metal, no OS, no other HLL). That's a significant level of complexity right there. And it's entirely possible to make a fully compliant stripped-down ANS Forth with only the CORE wordset (and some of that supplied as optional add-ons) if you want to. It will be familiar and accessible to anyone who knows any of the popular ANS Forths or who has access to the published books on Forth. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-22 12:52 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <kg8b5l$fvs$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #19599 |
"Elizabeth D Rather" <erather@forth.com> wrote in message news:9dCdnXnED5-IcYvMnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@supernews.com... > And it's entirely possible to make a fully compliant > stripped-down ANS Forth with only the CORE wordset > (and some of that supplied as optional add-ons) if you want to. From my in-progress, mostly fig-Forth based, Forth interpreter in C, I'd say CORE and CORE EXT are needed to "make a fully compliant stripped-down ANS Forth". Some of the CORE EXT functionality seems to be needed to *correctly* implement the CORE words. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-22 09:25 -1000 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <NfCdnb9NRpuOW7rMnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #19918 |
On 2/22/13 7:52 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > "Elizabeth D Rather" <erather@forth.com> wrote in message > news:9dCdnXnED5-IcYvMnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@supernews.com... > >> And it's entirely possible to make a fully compliant >> stripped-down ANS Forth with only the CORE wordset >> (and some of that supplied as optional add-ons) if you want to. > > From my in-progress, mostly fig-Forth based, Forth interpreter in > C, I'd say CORE and CORE EXT are needed to "make a fully compliant > stripped-down ANS Forth". Some of the CORE EXT functionality > seems to be needed to *correctly* implement the CORE words. But the nice thing about factoring CORE EXT is that you can include exactly those words you find useful, and leave out the others if you wish. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-10 08:15 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <n6mdncJlcpLzNorMnZ2dnUVZ_oCdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #19589 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> all the rest of us who are trying to >> promote Forth and therefore need standards. > > I think C benefitted from having a standard, and Ada and Cobol would > have been diminished enormously without standards. Lisp on the other > hand may have been damaged by standardization (Common Lisp). Forth may > be more spiritually aligned with Lisp than it is with C or Cobol. So > it's not so clear to me that the ANS opponents aren't onto something. > Retroforth (retroforth.org) despite its name, looks relatively clean > and modern compared to ANS Forth. Umm, what's "clean and modern" about it? It looks like a hybrid of Forth and LISP, which is okay if you like that sort of thing, but I would have thought that if you want Lisp you use Lisp not Forth, and vice versa. Seriously, this is not a flame: I'm mystified. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-10 23:34 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <7xk3qfcnht.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #19607 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: > Umm, what's "clean and modern" about it? It looks like a hybrid of > Forth and LISP, which is okay if you like that sort of thing, but I > would have thought that if you want Lisp you use Lisp not Forth, and > vice versa. Now that you mention it, I do see some possible Lisp influence, but it's certainly not a Lisp hybrid! No runtime type tags, no lambda binding, no garbage collection, and the Ngaro VM is clearly a partly token-threaded and partly ITC Forth interpreter that could be translated to machine code straightforwardly if desired. I see the read loop (I guess Forth would call this the quit loop) as cleaner than Forth's, and with less of the clunky historical Forth machinery sticking out from the compiler. I could even claim that it moves from ANS somewhat in the direction of Colorforth. That said, I've only looked at some of the doc pages. I haven't tried running it or examined the code.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-11 22:14 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <51196d3a$0$4177$862e30e2@ngroups.net> |
| In reply to | #19627 |
Paul Rubin wrote: <7xk3qfcnht.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> > I see the read loop (I guess Forth would call this the quit loop) as > cleaner than Forth's, and with less of the clunky historical Forth > machinery sticking out from the compiler. It should be possible to make an ANS forth with a read loop like Retroforth's -- AFAICS that's just an implementation detail. --Josh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-11 13:34 -1000 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <hvmdnYDycNpw4oTMnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #19646 |
On 2/11/13 12:14 PM, Josh Grams wrote: > Paul Rubin wrote: <7xk3qfcnht.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> >> I see the read loop (I guess Forth would call this the quit loop) as >> cleaner than Forth's, and with less of the clunky historical Forth >> machinery sticking out from the compiler. > > It should be possible to make an ANS forth with a read loop like > Retroforth's -- AFAICS that's just an implementation detail. There are any number of implementations of the QUIT loop in ANS Forth, some cleaner than others. Probably every implementation does it a little bit differently. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-11 11:52 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <kf9fe1$pbt$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #19588 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/9/13 6:27 AM, Zbiggy wrote: > > Actually, on IsForth doc-pages I've found an interesting quote: > > > > "The ans Forth standard does NOT describe the Forth language but a language > > of the same name" (Chuck Moore) > > > > What was rationale for such statement? Did Mr. Moore say more about this? > > > > Chuck sails under his own flag, so to speak, and has no use for > standards. To him, "Forth" is what he's doing right now, which may or > may not resemble what he did last year, or what anyone else wants to do. > ... That's a bit rough. Perhaps we can discover what Forth is by looking at what has remained constant throughout Chuck's Forths e.g. stack-based RPN language, few types, basic constructs, simple compiler, small size, few cosmetics, no locals ... and he still likes screens.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-10 17:11 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <7xfw13slhm.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #19619 |
"Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> writes: > simple compiler, small size, few cosmetics, no locals ... and he still > likes screens. For a while he was into programming with no source code. I think he's since decided that the no-source thing didn't work out.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-10 22:06 -1000 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <dOSdncf2QskRO4XMnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #19619 |
On 2/10/13 2:52 PM, Ed wrote:
> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>> On 2/9/13 6:27 AM, Zbiggy wrote:
>>> Actually, on IsForth doc-pages I've found an interesting quote:
>>>
>>> "The ans Forth standard does NOT describe the Forth language but a language
>>> of the same name" (Chuck Moore)
>>>
>>> What was rationale for such statement? Did Mr. Moore say more about this?
>>>
>>
>> Chuck sails under his own flag, so to speak, and has no use for
>> standards. To him, "Forth" is what he's doing right now, which may or
>> may not resemble what he did last year, or what anyone else wants to do.
>> ...
>
> That's a bit rough. Perhaps we can discover what Forth is by looking at what
> has remained constant throughout Chuck's Forths e.g. stack-based RPN
> language, few types, basic constructs, simple compiler, small size, few
> cosmetics, no locals ... and he still likes screens.
I intend no disrespect, or even disapproval. In fact, he's said as much
many times.
Consider your list:
* stack-based RPN language: Linear vs. circular stacks?
* few types: Unlimited types, in fact. That's an asset! Does colorforth
support DOES> ?
* basic constructs: Ah, but which? The list varies dramatically! And
what does OR do? What happened to SWAP?
* simple compiler: In current implementations it's mainly an assembler,
but does complex pre-compilation, so there's no text source.
* small size: Yup, that's consistent. 2Kb kernel in 1973, in 2013 128
words of memory (max 512 instructions) total per node!
* few cosmetics: Fewer every year.
* no locals: Never have been, never will be. I support this 100%, btw.
* still likes screens: But no longer likes printable source
It works for him, and for a number of other people. And the GA144 may be
great for some applications. But a general-purpose language has to scale
from small embedded systems to large PCs to big networks, with multiple
vendors and sources of support. A standard can make this happen; a
design that varies as dramatically as Chuck's current "Forth" cannot
support a stable development environment.
Nothing wrong with continual change and experimentation; as I said,
that's what geniuses do. The good stuff will survive, with luck. But a
broadbased technology needs the stability that a standard provides.
That's not to say that a standardized language is frozen: the standards
bodies (e.g. ANSI, IEEE, ISO) actually *require* standards to be
revisited ever few years. Standards need to evolve, to respond to
changing needs and developments, but the evolution needs to have a wide
base of support, provision for feedback, and input from multiple
developers and users.
Yes, there are some languages and OSs with single "czars". But those
that have survived have benefitted from a leader who can consider these
wider issues and needs, and keep an open ear to user input. Chuck tried
that for a while, but it didn't work for him, so he took a different path.
Cheers,
Elizabeth
--
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com
"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charles Childers" <crc@retroforth.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-11 17:17 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <op.wsc371wf6ef20b@denney-2466a6df> |
| In reply to | #19628 |
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 03:06:35 -0500, Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote: > * few types: Unlimited types, in fact. That's an asset! Does colorforth > support DOES> ? colorforth does not have does> -- crc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-13 11:42 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <kfenj3$f2d$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #19628 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/10/13 2:52 PM, Ed wrote: > > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> ... > >> Chuck sails under his own flag, so to speak, and has no use for > >> standards. To him, "Forth" is what he's doing right now, which may or > >> may not resemble what he did last year, or what anyone else wants to do. > >> ... > > > > That's a bit rough. Perhaps we can discover what Forth is by looking at what > > has remained constant throughout Chuck's Forths e.g. stack-based RPN > > language, few types, basic constructs, simple compiler, small size, few > > cosmetics, no locals ... and he still likes screens. > > I intend no disrespect, or even disapproval. In fact, he's said as much > many times. > > Consider your list: > > * stack-based RPN language: Linear vs. circular stacks? > * few types: Unlimited types, in fact. That's an asset! Does colorforth > support DOES> ? > * basic constructs: Ah, but which? The list varies dramatically! And > what does OR do? What happened to SWAP? > * simple compiler: In current implementations it's mainly an assembler, > but does complex pre-compilation, so there's no text source. > * small size: Yup, that's consistent. 2Kb kernel in 1973, in 2013 128 > words of memory (max 512 instructions) total per node! > * few cosmetics: Fewer every year. > * no locals: Never have been, never will be. I support this 100%, btw. > * still likes screens: But no longer likes printable source > > It works for him, and for a number of other people. And the GA144 may be > great for some applications. But a general-purpose language has to scale > from small embedded systems to large PCs to big networks, with multiple > vendors and sources of support. A standard can make this happen; a > design that varies as dramatically as Chuck's current "Forth" cannot > support a stable development environment. > ... Did I say Colorforth should be standardized? Yes, he has experimented and he's tried different strategies over the years. One wouldn't expect anything else. AFAIK it's been others who took the snapshot of what he's done and adapted or standardized it for their own ends. > Nothing wrong with continual change and experimentation; as I said, > that's what geniuses do. The good stuff will survive, with luck. But a > broadbased technology needs the stability that a standard provides. > That's not to say that a standardized language is frozen: the standards > bodies (e.g. ANSI, IEEE, ISO) actually *require* standards to be > revisited ever few years. Standards need to evolve, to respond to > changing needs and developments, but the evolution needs to have a wide > base of support, provision for feedback, and input from multiple > developers and users. > > Yes, there are some languages and OSs with single "czars". But those > that have survived have benefitted from a leader who can consider these > wider issues and needs, and keep an open ear to user input. Chuck tried > that for a while, but it didn't work for him, so he took a different path. But a Standard based on who's principles if not Chuck's? Or is no principle involved at all - just a vote by persons with vested interests whose ideas change with each new TC that comes along? Forth has had several Standards and it has not brought stability or prosperity. Today there seems to be fewer users and vendors than ever. I no longer follow Standards because I've learnt they aren't the repository of all wisdom. I'll take what I need insofar as I can determine it represents Forth values. More and more however I look back to Classic Forth for guidance. Chuck stated in a 2009 interview: "Forth has gradually become more complicated to suit the taste of contemporary programmers and the complexity of modern computers." It was not a compliment.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-12 16:07 -1000 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <vcmdnaxpQNHyaIfMnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #19687 |
On 2/12/13 2:42 PM, Ed wrote: > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 2/10/13 2:52 PM, Ed wrote: >>> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >>>> ... >>>> Chuck sails under his own flag, so to speak, and has no use for >>>> standards. To him, "Forth" is what he's doing right now, which may or >>>> may not resemble what he did last year, or what anyone else wants to do. >>>> ... >>> >>> That's a bit rough. Perhaps we can discover what Forth is by looking at what >>> has remained constant throughout Chuck's Forths e.g. stack-based RPN >>> language, few types, basic constructs, simple compiler, small size, few >>> cosmetics, no locals ... and he still likes screens. >> >> I intend no disrespect, or even disapproval. In fact, he's said as much >> many times. >> >> Consider your list: >> >> * stack-based RPN language: Linear vs. circular stacks? >> * few types: Unlimited types, in fact. That's an asset! Does colorforth >> support DOES> ? >> * basic constructs: Ah, but which? The list varies dramatically! And >> what does OR do? What happened to SWAP? >> * simple compiler: In current implementations it's mainly an assembler, >> but does complex pre-compilation, so there's no text source. >> * small size: Yup, that's consistent. 2Kb kernel in 1973, in 2013 128 >> words of memory (max 512 instructions) total per node! >> * few cosmetics: Fewer every year. >> * no locals: Never have been, never will be. I support this 100%, btw. >> * still likes screens: But no longer likes printable source >> >> It works for him, and for a number of other people. And the GA144 may be >> great for some applications. But a general-purpose language has to scale >> from small embedded systems to large PCs to big networks, with multiple >> vendors and sources of support. A standard can make this happen; a >> design that varies as dramatically as Chuck's current "Forth" cannot >> support a stable development environment. >> ... > > Did I say Colorforth should be standardized? No, I don't think anyone is that foolish! I was trying to described the need for one, which doesn't really apply to him or (at this point) to Greenarrays. They're fine as they are. People trying to do a broader base of projects need standards. > Yes, he has experimented and he's tried different strategies over the > years. One wouldn't expect anything else. AFAIK it's been others > who took the snapshot of what he's done and adapted or standardized > it for their own ends. Absolutely. That's what I am saying. That's appropriate, IMO. >> Nothing wrong with continual change and experimentation; as I said, >> that's what geniuses do. The good stuff will survive, with luck. But a >> broadbased technology needs the stability that a standard provides. >> That's not to say that a standardized language is frozen: the standards >> bodies (e.g. ANSI, IEEE, ISO) actually *require* standards to be >> revisited ever few years. Standards need to evolve, to respond to >> changing needs and developments, but the evolution needs to have a wide >> base of support, provision for feedback, and input from multiple >> developers and users. >> >> Yes, there are some languages and OSs with single "czars". But those >> that have survived have benefitted from a leader who can consider these >> wider issues and needs, and keep an open ear to user input. Chuck tried >> that for a while, but it didn't work for him, so he took a different path. > > But a Standard based on who's principles if not Chuck's? Or is no principle > involved at all - just a vote by persons with vested interests whose ideas > change with each new TC that comes along? Forth has had several > Standards and it has not brought stability or prosperity. Today there seems > to be fewer users and vendors than ever. I have to disagree here. Each of the standards has been beneficial. Forth83 had some unfortunately divisive things in it, because it was too rushed. Forth94 was much better, and 200x is doing well. Vested interests? Sure. Working on a standard a commitment of time and money, and one should have an expectation of reward. A properly run standards effort ensures that there is a sufficiently diverse set of interests represented that the resulting product satisfies a broad spectrum of needs, and viewpoints are balanced. Stability? A technology has to progress, but must do so at an ordered pace. The major standards bodies, who are experienced in these things, require a standard to be re-examined or reaffirmed every 5 years, to ensure it keeps up to date. But standards that change too fast create too much instability. As one who was dependent on Forth for my living for 35 years, and who has worked with many individuals and companies equally dependent, I must say I have found Forth to have brought a satisfactory level of both stability and prosperity. > I no longer follow Standards because I've learnt they aren't the repository > of all wisdom. I'll take what I need insofar as I can determine it represents > Forth values. More and more however I look back to Classic Forth for > guidance. Anyone who works as an individual is certainly entitled to do whatever works. The broader the net of folks dependent on your work, the more you have to consider wider issues. > Chuck stated in a 2009 interview: > > "Forth has gradually become more complicated to suit the taste of > contemporary programmers and the complexity of modern computers." > > It was not a compliment. Maybe not, but it was necessary. Had that not happened, Forth would not have survived as well as it has. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-15 09:42 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <kfjpl4$vb6$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #19690 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/12/13 2:42 PM, Ed wrote: > ... > > Chuck stated in a 2009 interview: > > > > "Forth has gradually become more complicated to suit the taste of > > contemporary programmers and the complexity of modern computers." > > > > It was not a compliment. > > Maybe not, but it was necessary. Had that not happened, Forth would not > have survived as well as it has. If having the lowest number of users and vendors in its history and being reduced to securing votes from lurkers on a usenet group is surviving well, then Forth is indeed a most unusual language. Though why it needs another Standard in the face of such dwindling numbers is puzzling. There is no competition when there is two vendors remaining.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-02-15 00:16 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: OT: ANS Forth |
| Message-ID | <slrnkhqvli.q26.zbigniew2011REMOVE@Tichy.myhome.org> |
| In reply to | #19738 |
In comp.lang.forth, Ed wrote: > If having the lowest number of users and vendors in its history and being > reduced to securing votes from lurkers on a usenet group is surviving well, > then Forth is indeed a most unusual language. I've got a feeling, it may change during following years. There are numerous designs of new "home-computer" generations: - commercial: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2057605091/p112-single-board-computer-kit http://www.xgamestation.com/ http://propellerpowered.us/index.php?route=product/product&path=25_73&product_id=55 - "homebrew": http://www.msarnoff.org/6809/ https://sites.google.com/site/retroelec/ http://sbc.rictor.org/ http://www.rickard.gunee.com/projects/ http://www.linusakesson.net/scene/craft/ As I see, presently they mostly program their designs in assembler, or C. But soon most of these people will find, that Forth is better suited for this... -- It's us, the scobs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web