Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #27495 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-12-28 23:39 -0800 |
| Last post | 2014-01-03 14:52 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 330 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-12-28 23:39 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2013-12-28 21:52 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2013-12-29 11:28 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2013-12-29 23:12 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-29 07:45 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2013-12-29 18:33 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-29 16:57 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2013-12-30 00:25 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-01 13:29 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-01 14:18 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-01-01 15:46 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-01-01 15:26 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-03 13:22 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-01-03 11:54 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-06 10:57 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-03 14:07 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-06 12:42 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 14:22 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-03 09:06 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 11:10 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-04 11:49 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-05 13:14 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-04 16:35 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-05 11:35 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-05 06:15 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-05 15:11 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-05 10:07 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-05 21:14 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-06 04:44 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-06 12:42 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-06 21:51 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-06 22:41 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-07 03:29 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2014-01-07 11:48 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-07 12:58 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-07 15:13 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-07 10:22 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-08 02:20 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-07 14:13 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-09 23:19 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-10 17:19 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-10 09:02 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-13 13:28 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-14 09:05 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-01-14 04:05 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-14 12:36 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-15 11:37 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-13 17:07 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-11 01:40 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-13 11:21 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-01-13 01:50 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-13 12:05 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-13 03:19 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-13 03:36 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-12 19:22 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-11 17:09 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-02 17:06 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-02 08:13 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-02 18:59 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 12:54 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 07:19 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2013-12-29 22:32 -0500
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-12-30 16:46 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2013-12-30 18:37 -0500
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2013-12-31 11:53 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-12-30 17:21 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-30 12:03 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-12-30 18:09 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-30 12:43 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-02 16:52 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-02 08:32 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-05 13:26 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-04 16:55 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-07 12:45 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-06 22:15 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-15 08:39 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-05 12:53 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-02 13:45 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-02 20:17 -0500
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 04:03 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 13:43 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 11:53 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-01 23:57 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-01 13:19 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-02 19:48 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-02 19:13 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-02 15:44 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-02 23:56 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-02 15:43 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-02 15:34 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 04:14 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-03 17:49 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 12:03 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-03 10:31 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-03 19:19 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-03 09:56 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-04 04:18 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-04 12:39 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-03 21:43 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-03 13:45 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-03 23:10 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-03 15:41 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-01-10 22:05 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-04 04:21 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? oh2aun@gmail.com - 2014-01-10 06:46 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-07 13:33 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-07 08:44 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-08 14:52 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-08 08:41 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-09 08:14 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-07 18:41 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-08 15:09 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-08 20:00 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-08 12:45 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-09 00:16 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-01-10 22:34 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-01-10 22:41 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-10 23:12 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-01-10 23:04 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-10 22:08 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-09 02:16 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-09 04:18 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-09 11:19 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-09 09:04 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-10 17:27 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-10 11:37 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? oh2aun@gmail.com - 2014-01-10 12:47 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-10 13:37 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? oh2aun@gmail.com - 2014-01-10 14:24 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-13 16:53 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-09 14:50 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-09 09:08 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-09 18:33 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-09 12:32 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-09 20:49 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-09 09:10 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-09 14:37 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-07 08:48 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-08 15:24 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-08 08:50 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-09 08:28 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-08 16:21 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-09 09:39 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-09 04:28 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-09 11:27 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-09 14:42 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-09 09:41 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-09 18:44 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-09 12:35 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-10 00:20 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-10 05:22 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-01-10 03:48 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-10 09:31 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-09 09:40 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-01-10 21:54 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-11 03:41 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-11 13:33 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-01-11 11:44 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-11 10:40 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-11 04:11 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-11 13:31 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-11 07:52 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-11 19:35 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-12 02:57 -0600
chipFORTH [Was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-12 03:12 -0600
Re: chipFORTH Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-12 08:43 -0800
Re: chipFORTH Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-12 10:40 -0600
Re: chipFORTH albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-12 18:00 +0000
Re: chipFORTH Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-01-12 11:18 -0800
Re: chipFORTH anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-13 16:03 +0000
Re: chipFORTH "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-01-13 17:21 +0000
Re: chipFORTH stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-13 19:10 +0000
Re: chipFORTH [Was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?] "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-13 02:28 -0500
Re: chipFORTH [Was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?] Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-12 21:39 -1000
Re: chipFORTH [Was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-13 03:16 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-12 11:38 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-12 07:46 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-13 15:46 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-13 10:45 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-13 19:05 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-13 20:53 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-14 03:41 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-14 13:07 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-14 17:53 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-14 17:35 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-14 08:23 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-14 13:19 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? oh2aun@gmail.com - 2014-01-14 12:31 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-14 21:37 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-14 16:12 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-14 12:18 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-15 04:19 +0100
DOES> and flash (was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-15 17:52 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash (was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?) stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-15 21:56 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash (was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-16 09:30 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2014-01-17 12:44 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash oh2aun@gmail.com - 2014-01-17 08:05 -0800
Re: DOES> and flash anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-17 16:43 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-17 20:37 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-18 04:40 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-18 11:56 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-18 10:54 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-18 17:36 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-18 12:17 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-18 18:23 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-18 14:00 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-18 20:24 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-18 14:05 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-18 23:12 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-19 03:38 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-19 14:03 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-19 09:17 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-19 15:31 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-19 19:48 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-18 18:11 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-01-19 01:12 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-19 21:53 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2014-01-20 11:32 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash (was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-16 02:02 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-01-16 07:19 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-16 00:22 -0800
Re: DOES> and flash Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-16 15:38 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-01-20 09:45 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash (was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-16 09:33 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash (was: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based?) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-16 16:09 +0100
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-17 03:28 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-17 11:39 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-17 08:16 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-01-17 16:06 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-18 17:21 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-19 12:32 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-19 09:19 -0600
Re: DOES> and flash stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-19 18:20 +0000
Re: DOES> and flash Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-20 01:25 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-14 08:31 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-14 01:33 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-14 10:05 +0000
CREATE...DOES> on program-in-flash systems anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-14 11:58 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-11 08:43 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-11 19:37 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-11 11:28 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-01-11 12:24 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-03 18:19 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-03 22:03 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 13:28 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-03 15:09 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-02 03:41 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-02 18:09 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 04:16 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-02 22:58 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2013-12-29 22:34 -0500
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-12-29 19:30 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-12-29 22:49 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2013-12-30 08:48 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-12-30 16:24 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-30 11:18 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-12-30 17:32 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-30 12:05 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-02 11:02 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-02 05:48 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 11:00 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2013-12-31 21:42 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2013-12-30 09:14 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-30 03:35 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-12-30 16:06 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-30 10:41 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-12-30 17:50 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-30 12:21 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-02 11:21 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-02 07:08 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 11:13 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 07:36 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 15:23 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-01-03 16:02 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-03 08:54 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-01-03 19:59 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-03 10:12 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Tristan Plumb <st@trstn.net> - 2014-01-03 20:17 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-01-03 20:29 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-03 11:48 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-04 12:00 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-01-04 13:12 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-04 08:22 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-01-10 21:37 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-02 16:58 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-02 16:41 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-02 16:54 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-02 23:22 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-02 23:20 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 11:56 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-12-30 08:14 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-30 12:54 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2013-12-31 23:15 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-12-31 07:05 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-12-31 09:26 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-01 13:27 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-12-31 18:21 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-01 12:12 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-03 15:59 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-01-03 00:19 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-05 13:25 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-01-04 19:03 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-06 14:08 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-01-06 01:47 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-07 12:43 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-08 13:29 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-08 16:30 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-11 23:12 +1100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 14:30 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2014-01-04 13:57 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-04 12:17 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-04 15:08 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-05 04:57 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-05 09:14 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-05 12:20 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-08 13:05 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-08 08:55 -1000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-09 08:49 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-19 11:24 -0500
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2014-01-04 16:06 -0800
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-07 13:47 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2013-12-30 18:29 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-02 09:34 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-02 20:06 -0500
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-01-03 11:34 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-03 08:04 -0500
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-03 07:38 -0600
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-01-03 15:57 +0100
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-03 14:17 +0000
Re: PICK changed from 1-based to 0-based? Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-01-03 14:52 +0000
Page 15 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15] 16 17 Next page →
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-04 12:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Jan4.130003@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #27656 |
Tristan Plumb <st@trstn.net> writes:
>On 2014-01-03, Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
>> Yes it does. In 4. Definition of Terms for "flag" Forth79 says,
>> "...Standard word definitions leave 1 for true, 0 for false." Then in
>> the glossory for words such as 0< the stack picture is: n -- flag
>
><http://forthworks.com/standards/F79/F79.txt> line 127
>|flag
>|
>| A numerical value with two logical states; 0 = false, non-
>| zero = true.
>
>Were there multiple versions?
Sure, the version you link to does not have Sections 3-8. You could
have noticed that something is missing when you see Section 9 directly
following Section 2. Anyway, I came across
<http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/fth79std/FORTH-79.TXT>, which
contains sections 3-8, and the plain text form may be more convenient
than the PDF form that Elizabeth Rather linked to.
- 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 2013: http://www.euroforth.org/ef13/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-04 13:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlcg268.3h4.st@tumtum.plumbweb.net> |
| In reply to | #27667 |
On 2014-01-04, Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > Tristan Plumb <st@trstn.net> writes: >>On 2014-01-03, Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote: >>> Yes it does. In 4. Definition of Terms for "flag" Forth79 says, >>> "...Standard word definitions leave 1 for true, 0 for false." Then in >>> the glossory for words such as 0< the stack picture is: n -- flag >> >><http://forthworks.com/standards/F79/F79.txt> line 127 >>|flag >>| >>| A numerical value with two logical states; 0 = false, non- >>| zero = true. >> >>Were there multiple versions? > Sure, the version you link to does not have Sections 3-8. You could > have noticed that something is missing when you see Section 9 directly > following Section 2. Anyway, I came across ><http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/fth79std/FORTH-79.TXT>, which > contains sections 3-8, and the plain text form may be more convenient > than the PDF form that Elizabeth Rather linked to. Thanks, when I found my error I started looking for a complete text version, but mostly found bad OCRs. It (obviously) didn't occur to me that someone might post an incomplete copy of the standard and I read the context around every instance of 'true' and 'false' heedless to extrania like section numbers... Does anyone have simular text copies of 77 or 78? Google is not hopeful. tristan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-04 08:22 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <GJSdnbN6wey7hFXPnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27669 |
Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> wrote: > > Does anyone have simular text copies of 77 or 78? Google is not hopeful. I've never seen either. It'd be interesting. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 21:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b301ce51-a41c-4199-803c-1112d10fb4f5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27626 |
On Friday, January 3, 2014 6:13:50 AM UTC-5, Anton Ertl wrote: > Sure, your corner of the Forth world had no interest in Forth-79, but > that was not true for everyone, and there were even people who the > stuck with Forh-79 long after Forth-83 had come out (Elizabeth Rather > called them Forth-79 holdouts). And the reasoning used in Forth-94 > was just as valid in 1983: if Forth-83 had not introduced incompatible > changes, there would have been a smooth transition possible from > Forth-79 to Forth-83, just as there was for Forth-94, and more people > would have made the transition, and there would have been less, if any > Forth-79 holdouts. I started in 1984 with RSC-Forth which was published by Rockwell in 1983 and written by Randy Dumse and I used it for more than 20 years. No reason to go to another Forth version, because RSC-Forth was ROM based. The manual doesn't say which Standard it is. RSC-Forth has <BUILDS and DOES> and PICK, but no ROLL. 4.2.5 Copy a Stack Item with PICK PICK looks down any depth into the stack and copies the nth number from the top (not counting the n itself) and places it on top. 1 PICK is the same as DUP , and 2 PICK is the same as OVER .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-02 16:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <la42gm$i1h$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #27586 |
Anton Ertl wrote:
> PICK and ROLL had been in Forth-79. Even for things that have not
> been standardized like Forth, Inc.'s usage of "{" and the various uses
> of PARSE-WORD, we avoided breakage by using new names ("{:" and
> PARSE-NAME) in Forth-2012; Forth-83 certainly should have done so for
> words that were already standardized and widely implemented and used.
Actually, I don't think we succeeded. Everybody who used { seems to
continue to use { instead of {:, it's the de facto standard (and Gforth
still doesn't implement {:). Sometimes you have to break someone's code, to
punish him for not looking out what the majority does with that syntax
element. It's non-standard, which not only means you can't rely on it on
other systems, it also means it might conflict with future standards.
The diversity of Forth systems in the early 1980s was largely due to not
invented here syndrome, which also made standardization efforts very
difficult. We still have that to quite some extent, and it often takes
years to get implementors to accept useful things (even if simple like the
relative-to-load-path stuff). Portability is a discipline which requires
less ego, and that's particularly a message to those who say that writing
portable programs requires less ego: The main ego problem IMHO is the one
of system implementors.
If you want your system to be ideosyncratic backward compatible by default
(which MPE obviously wants to, for reasons I won't question: customer
satisfaction and customer lock-in are worth it), then they should offer a
compatibility layer that makes the system standard conformant. E.g.
switching the decimal points to the standard ones, or loading the preferred
floating point library.
--
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-02 16:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52c594e4.795253800@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #27588 |
On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 16:58:11 +0100, Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: >If you want your system to be ideosyncratic backward compatible by default >(which MPE obviously wants to, for reasons I won't question: customer >satisfaction and customer lock-in are worth it), then they should offer a >compatibility layer that makes the system standard conformant. E.g. >switching the decimal points to the standard ones, or loading the preferred >floating point library. I don't know what triggered this rant, but Happy New Year to you too. We certainly try not to irritate clients. Backward compatibility may not be important to people with small applications, but it is really important to people with big applications. I have fought the good fight to make floating point input usable in applications as well as standard Forth source code. Similarly I tried to make double number entry usable in application code. In both cases we (MPE) can cope with internationalisation. With some reluctance, a while back we switched the defaults to be standards compliant. As to the defaults floating point pack, the only people who complain are you and Anton. You are both system implementors yourselves. 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]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-02 16:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52c599ac$0$9240$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #27589 |
In article <52c594e4.795253800@news.demon.co.uk>, Stephen Pelc <stephenXXX@mpeforth.com> wrote: >On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 16:58:11 +0100, Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> >wrote: > >>If you want your system to be ideosyncratic backward compatible by default >>(which MPE obviously wants to, for reasons I won't question: customer >>satisfaction and customer lock-in are worth it), then they should offer a >>compatibility layer that makes the system standard conformant. E.g. >>switching the decimal points to the standard ones, or loading the preferred >>floating point library. > >I don't know what triggered this rant, but Happy New Year to you too. > >We certainly try not to irritate clients. Backward compatibility may >not be important to people with small applications, but it is >really important to people with big applications. > >I have fought the good fight to make floating point input usable >in applications as well as standard Forth source code. Similarly >I tried to make double number entry usable in application code. >In both cases we (MPE) can cope with internationalisation. >With some reluctance, a while back we switched the defaults to >be standards compliant. > >As to the defaults floating point pack, the only people who >complain are you and Anton. You are both system implementors >yourselves. I don't follow. What are the complaints about the floating point pack? Is that the set F+ F- F. .... FSWAP .... FCOS I never heard anyone complain about that !? > >Stephen > Groetjes Albert -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-02 23:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <la4oro$ml0$2@online.de> |
| In reply to | #27590 |
Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <52c594e4.795253800@news.demon.co.uk>, >>As to the defaults floating point pack, the only people who >>complain are you and Anton. You are both system implementors >>yourselves. > > I don't follow. What are the complaints about the floating point pack? > Is that the set F+ F- F. .... FSWAP .... FCOS > I never heard anyone complain about that !? The complaint is that it isn't loaded by default, that there are three of them under names that are nontrivial to guess (it's not just "include float.fth" or such), and therefore porting even a very trivial floating point program requires system-specific knowledge. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-02 23:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <la4omn$ml0$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #27589 |
Stephen Pelc wrote: > On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 16:58:11 +0100, Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> > wrote: > >>If you want your system to be ideosyncratic backward compatible by default >>(which MPE obviously wants to, for reasons I won't question: customer >>satisfaction and customer lock-in are worth it), then they should offer a >>compatibility layer that makes the system standard conformant. E.g. >>switching the decimal points to the standard ones, or loading the >>preferred floating point library. > > I don't know what triggered this rant, but Happy New Year to you too. > > We certainly try not to irritate clients. Backward compatibility may > not be important to people with small applications, but it is > really important to people with big applications. I don't want to irritate my "customers" either (even though they are non- paying customers), so I keep some things backwards compatible even if I consider that no longer a good idea. > I have fought the good fight to make floating point input usable > in applications as well as standard Forth source code. Similarly > I tried to make double number entry usable in application code. > In both cases we (MPE) can cope with internationalisation. > With some reluctance, a while back we switched the defaults to > be standards compliant. Indeed. Nearly 20 years after they became standard ;-). > As to the defaults floating point pack, the only people who > complain are you and Anton. You are both system implementors > yourselves. Ah, come on Stephen, you know what the feedback ratio is, it's not even an 80/20 rule. I said to you that you gave me the most valueable feedback for Minos, and I'm quite sure that was because you are a system implementor and you don't put up with idiocy I implemented, so you complained. So do we. Just listen to every complaint you get, and with every complaint you fix, you will improve the satisfaction of another 20 costumers who didn't dare to complain. bigForth didn't load the floating point library by default, either. The only complaint I got was from Anton. I fixed it, and I'm sure more people than Anton were happy with the result. That's how feedback works. "Nobody complained" is wrong once the first person complains, so it's not an argument. At least 10 years ago we had programmed Lego RCX bricks on a Forth Tagung, and we asked Martin Bitter how his students tolerated the bugs in the RCX Forth. He said "they don't know better". That's the reason why many people don't complain. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-03 11:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Jan3.125612@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #27588 |
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> writes:
>Anton Ertl wrote:
>> PICK and ROLL had been in Forth-79. Even for things that have not
>> been standardized like Forth, Inc.'s usage of "{" and the various uses
>> of PARSE-WORD, we avoided breakage by using new names ("{:" and
>> PARSE-NAME) in Forth-2012; Forth-83 certainly should have done so for
>> words that were already standardized and widely implemented and used.
>
>Actually, I don't think we succeeded. Everybody who used { seems to
>continue to use { instead of {:, it's the de facto standard
Sure, that's a consequence of supporting a smooth transition: There is
not much pressure to make the switch, so the transition is slow. But
over time it will happen, and then the programs will be portable to
SwiftForth without needing to load extra files, and can be combined
with programs written for SwiftForth.
>(and Gforth still doesn't implement {:).
It would if the transition from CVS to git was as smooth as the
transition from Forth-94 to Forth-2012.
- 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 2013: http://www.euroforth.org/ef13/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-30 08:14 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <cMidnSnzULKdJVzPnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27529 |
On 12/30/13 6:41 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: >> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>> That's not the reason, IMO. If things were just as broken now as they >>> were before 1983, similar radical change would be needed. >> >> What breakage in Forth-79 made the change from 0-or-1 to >> 0-or-all-bits-set necessary? > > None at all, but I didn't state (or even imply) that it did. What I > did say is that Forth-79 was so broken that there was no need for > Forth-83 to be compatible with it. > >> What breakage in Forth-79 made the changes to PICK and ROLL necessary. >> >> And what breakage in Forth-79 made it necessary to implement these >> changes as incompatible changes of existing words instead of >> introducing new names? >> >> Concerning the brokenness of "before 1983", what was broken how? IIRC >> Elizabeth Rather once claimed that Forth-79 was contradictory, but she >> did not point to any concrete problems and neither do you. > > IIRC, Forth-79 didn't succeed in capturing the consensus of the Forth > vendors and implementors. It was, at best, a stopgap affair, and it > mandated some things (i.e. 16-bit addresses) that were obviously wrong > by 1983. Some Forth vendors had already looked at changing the form > of a well-formed flag from 1 to all 1s, and weren't going to let > Forth-79 stop them. Given that breaking changes were inevitable, > there was no point inventing new names for zero-based PICK and ROLL . As Anton pointed out earlier, FORTH83 still mandated 16-bit, threaded-code implementation, even though 32-bit processors were coming out. It relaxed the implementation restrictions of Forth 79 to allow any kind of threaded code, but it did not fully allow compilation to native machine code (this was not specifically prohibited, but rather was an indirect consequence of another provision). The main difficulty with Forth79 was that it was very brief and incomplete, and didn't address a lot of issues, although I'd have to find a copy (not easy!) and read it to dig out what the particular issues were. One of the very first things that the ANS Forth TC did was to attack the problem of specifying cell size. I am proud to say I wrote the proposals that did this, including using the term "cell" (the standard industry term for this was "word" but that had obvious problems in 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 | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-30 12:54 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <DoadnRnX1JbyXFzPnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27544 |
Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote: > The main difficulty with Forth79 was that it was very brief and > incomplete, and didn't address a lot of issues, although I'd have to > find a copy (not easy!) and read it to dig out what the particular > issues were. I'm looking at it here (I still have my 30-year-old paper copy!) and it is, as you say, very thin. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-31 23:15 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <l9ucul$80u$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #27544 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > ... > The main difficulty with Forth79 was that it was very brief and > incomplete, and didn't address a lot of issues, although I'd have to > find a copy (not easy!) and read it to dig out what the particular > issues were. ftp://ftp.forth.org/pub/Forth/Literature/fth79std.zip ftp://ftp.forth.org/pub/Forth/Archive/docs/FTH83STD.ZIP The following is Ray Duncan's take on Forth-79/83 from "Converting Fig-Forth to Forth-83" (unexpurgated version, pub. Dr. Dobbs Journal, May 1984). "Forth has a colorful history compared to most modem computer languages. It evolved into its current form within a few years as the result of the work of one man (Charles Moore), was jealously guarded as a proprietary product for quite a few more years, and came into widespread use only after a group of volunteer systems programmers created a set of public domain implementations in 1978. The same programmers founded the Forth Interest Group (FIG) shortly thereafter. Flushed by the success of the FIG implementations, our heroes formed the Forth Standards Team. The team was charged with creating a clear specification for the Forth language that could be used as a reference by both users and systems vendors. Ignoring the old engineering adage, "If it works, don't fix it," they produced the document known as the Forth-79 Standard, which was widely criticized and then almost as widely ignored. Back to the drawing boards for the Forth Standards Team. Reconvening in late 1982, they began the traditionally grueling process of creating a new Standard, which involves much lobbying, arguing, and infighting. In August 1983, they took a final vote and approved the Forth-83 Standard document. Even before Forth-83 hit the streets, it drew hostile comments from many vendors because it ignored or bypassed a number of important issues (such as reading device status and 32-bit implementations), was exceedingly vague about vocabularies (considered a vital feature of the language), and actually redefined the action of certain keywords and control structures that had been in common use for years - in essence creating a new language incompatible with all existing Forth programs. The reader may well ask how such a Standards document could be created and approved. The politics of Forth would make a fascinating subject for a sociologist's dissertation, but I'm not sure I understand them well enough to explain them. For the purposes of this article, let us just note that both the board of directors of FIG and the members of the Forth Standards Team are self-elected. Nearly all have been in office since the beginning of FIG, and their responsiveness and accountability to the membership of FIG (let alone the general community of Forth vendors and users) is minimal. With all of its peculiarities, the Forth-83 Standard seems likely to come into widespread use fairly quickly. The alternative is to stick with Forth-79, which has major deficiencies, or with fig-FORTH (Forth-78), which has become very dated."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-31 07:05 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <ZKGdnfSHgOm8XF_PnZ2dnUVZ_sKdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27559 |
Ed <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > > The following is Ray Duncan's take on Forth-79/83 from "Converting Fig-Forth > to Forth-83" (unexpurgated version, pub. Dr. Dobbs Journal, May 1984). > > Flushed by the success of the FIG implementations, our heroes formed > the Forth Standards Team. The team was charged with creating a > clear specification for the Forth language that could be used as a > reference by both users and systems vendors. Ignoring the old > engineering adage, "If it works, don't fix it," they produced the > document known as the Forth-79 Standard, which was widely criticized > and then almost as widely ignored. > ... > > Even before Forth-83 hit the streets, it drew hostile comments from > many vendors because it ignored or bypassed a number of important > issues (such as reading device status and 32-bit implementations), > was exceedingly vague about vocabularies (considered a vital feature > of the language), and actually redefined the action of certain > keywords and control structures that had been in common use for > years - in essence creating a new language incompatible with all > existing Forth programs. > > The reader may well ask how such a Standards document could be > created and approved. The politics of Forth would make a > fascinating subject for a sociologist's dissertation, but I'm not > sure I understand them well enough to explain them. For the purposes > of this article, let us just note that both the board of directors > of FIG and the members of the Forth Standards Team are self-elected. > Nearly all have been in office since the beginning of FIG, and their > responsiveness and accountability to the membership of FIG (let > alone the general community of Forth vendors and users) is minimal. > > With all of its peculiarities, the Forth-83 Standard seems likely to > come into widespread use fairly quickly. The alternative is to stick > with Forth-79, which has major deficiencies, or with fig-FORTH > (Forth-78), which has become very dated." It's hard for me to find much to argue with here, and it matches my memory well. However, "the members of the Forth Standards Team are self-elected" is rather precious. How else did he think they'd get the job? Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-31 09:26 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <r-WdnVEHrOzih17PnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27560 |
On 12/31/13 3:05 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > Ed <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >> >> The following is Ray Duncan's take on Forth-79/83 from "Converting Fig-Forth >> to Forth-83" (unexpurgated version, pub. Dr. Dobbs Journal, May 1984). >> >> Flushed by the success of the FIG implementations, our heroes formed >> the Forth Standards Team. The team was charged with creating a >> clear specification for the Forth language that could be used as a >> reference by both users and systems vendors. Ignoring the old >> engineering adage, "If it works, don't fix it," they produced the >> document known as the Forth-79 Standard, which was widely criticized >> and then almost as widely ignored. >> > ... >> >> Even before Forth-83 hit the streets, it drew hostile comments from >> many vendors because it ignored or bypassed a number of important >> issues (such as reading device status and 32-bit implementations), >> was exceedingly vague about vocabularies (considered a vital feature >> of the language), and actually redefined the action of certain >> keywords and control structures that had been in common use for >> years - in essence creating a new language incompatible with all >> existing Forth programs. >> >> The reader may well ask how such a Standards document could be >> created and approved. The politics of Forth would make a >> fascinating subject for a sociologist's dissertation, but I'm not >> sure I understand them well enough to explain them. For the purposes >> of this article, let us just note that both the board of directors >> of FIG and the members of the Forth Standards Team are self-elected. >> Nearly all have been in office since the beginning of FIG, and their >> responsiveness and accountability to the membership of FIG (let >> alone the general community of Forth vendors and users) is minimal. >> >> With all of its peculiarities, the Forth-83 Standard seems likely to >> come into widespread use fairly quickly. The alternative is to stick >> with Forth-79, which has major deficiencies, or with fig-FORTH >> (Forth-78), which has become very dated." > > It's hard for me to find much to argue with here, and it matches my > memory well. However, "the members of the Forth Standards Team are > self-elected" is rather precious. How else did he think they'd get > the job? I agree that Ray's description is spot on. As for how Standards Team members are chosen, I will comment that the Forth83 group, as well as the Forth79 group, were basically composed of whoever showed up, and everyone got a vote regardless of background or affiliation. Forth79 was developed in one long weekend on Catalina Island, and Forth83 was the result of two meetings about 6 months apart, both in California. The last draft was subject to a single up-or-down vote, with no opportunity for further consideration or revision. In addition to the issues we've discussed, I'll give one more example of the way that group worked: At the first meeting, it was agreed that we should standardize what ' returned and EXECUTE used. It was agreed that this should be the address of the Parameter Field of the definition. FORTH, Inc. promptly implemented this in our new product line, polyFORTH, which attempted to track the standard as much as possible. But the next meeting decided, no, it should be the address of the Code Field. By this time, it was not really feasible for FORTH, Inc. to make so profound a change, so we didn't (although we did adopt as many less-profound changes as we could). Some other widely-used systems went one way, some another. The attempt to standardize this failed. Forth 94 correctly decided not to specify implementation at that level of detail, and introduced the notion of an xt, which is an opaque object with rules of usage. The ANS Forth effort, in contrast, was developed over 6 years of 4 multi-day meetings/year, each in a different part of the US (and two in Canada), with strict rules from ANSI governing membership and representation as well as operation. An organization (such as Forth vendors, user organizations, or groups like FIG) could have one member and one alternate, but only one vote. Prospective members had to attend two consecutive meeting before achieving voting status. Typically, we had 12-14 current voting members. Towards the end, Release Candidate drafts had to be published and subjected to a 4-month public review process. All comments had to be responded to by the TC, and if there were *any* technical changes as a result of comments another 4-month review was required. Meetings operated in a two-level process: there was a Technical Subcommittee (called the TSC), chaired by Greg Bailey, which thrashed out all the technical details of proposals. This group was composed of both official TC members and anyone else who chose to attend. As we met in diverse geographical areas, we always publicized our meetings and welcomed all Forth users. We typically ended up with 6-10 non-TC members in addition to the official members. In this way, we got technical input from very diverse sources. When the TSC achieved consensus on an issue, they brought it to the formal TC, which I chaired, with a recommendation for passage or rejection. This group could pass a proposal (in which case it went into the next draft), reject it, or refer it back to the TSC for further work. All decisions with more than 3 dissenting votes were referred back to the TSC. As a result of this lengthy process, ANS Forth was thoroughly vetted both by the TC members and the rest of the Forth community. There were no casual decisions that were made at the last minute without review, new technology (e.g. CATCH/THROW) was tested thoroughly by multiple implementers and users, and all points of view were represented. Quite a different process. And the result, though far from perfect, was much sounder. 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@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-01 13:27 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <l9vur7$ol0$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #27565 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > ... > As a result of this lengthy process, ANS Forth was thoroughly vetted > both by the TC members and the rest of the Forth community. There were > no casual decisions that were made at the last minute without review, > new technology (e.g. CATCH/THROW) was tested thoroughly by multiple > implementers and users, and all points of view were represented. According to M.Bradley's own comments CATCH/THROW was conceived in a bath tub on the morning of an ANS meeting at which time he floated the idea. He was given the nod and told to go away and produce a spec. That it all worked out without too many issues may have had more to do with good luck and Bradley's skills, than anything the TC did. An example of the blind leading the blind has to be f/p output. It's plain the TC had no idea. Had they stuck with the FVG recommendations it wouldn't have been so bad. But that too presented problems since not even the vendors behind FVG knew how to implement the functions properly. The "solution" was a primitive, which no-one had tested except perhaps trivially, and dished out to forthers along with the near-useless F. FS. FE. > Quite a different process. And the result, though far from perfect, was > much sounder. Certainly ANS was a big effort which required "managing". The document itself being an order of magnitude greater than '83. That said, ANS owed much to '83. Whether ANS achieved its goal of putting Forth back on the map is debatable. If nothing else, it has provided an endless topic of conversation :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-12-31 18:21 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <U4adnV40MuR9Cl7PnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27572 |
On 12/31/13 4:27 PM, Ed wrote: > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> ... >> As a result of this lengthy process, ANS Forth was thoroughly vetted >> both by the TC members and the rest of the Forth community. There were >> no casual decisions that were made at the last minute without review, >> new technology (e.g. CATCH/THROW) was tested thoroughly by multiple >> implementers and users, and all points of view were represented. > > According to M.Bradley's own comments CATCH/THROW was conceived > in a bath tub on the morning of an ANS meeting at which time he floated the > idea. He was given the nod and told to go away and produce a spec. That it > all worked out without too many issues may have had more to do with good > luck and Bradley's skills, than anything the TC did. I'm happy to report that a number of people implemented and used CATCH/THROW for over a year before it was finally adopted. > An example of the blind leading the blind has to be f/p output. It's plain the > TC had no idea. Had they stuck with the FVG recommendations it wouldn't > have been so bad. But that too presented problems since not even the vendors > behind FVG knew how to implement the functions properly. The "solution" > was a primitive, which no-one had tested except perhaps trivially, and dished > out to forthers along with the near-useless F. FS. FE. > >> Quite a different process. And the result, though far from perfect, was >> much sounder. > > Certainly ANS was a big effort which required "managing". The document > itself being an order of magnitude greater than '83. That said, ANS owed > much to '83. Whether ANS achieved its goal of putting Forth back on the > map is debatable. If nothing else, it has provided an endless topic of > conversation :) I'm not sure the goal was solely to "put Forth back on the map." The primary motivation was to get some amount of portability, not just for programs, but most importantly for programmers, by reducing the gulf between "dialects". That was very successful. And, certainly, a number of very major projects have been able to use Forth because its advocates could point to an ANSI standard, to minimize the fears of management. 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 | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-01 12:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52c404f7.692872840@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #27572 |
On Wed, 1 Jan 2014 13:27:07 +1100, "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >According to M.Bradley's own comments CATCH/THROW was conceived >in a bath tub on the morning of an ANS meeting at which time he floated the >idea. He was given the nod and told to go away and produce a spec. That it >all worked out without too many issues may have had more to do with good >luck and Bradley's skills, than anything the TC did. The idea for CATCH and THROW came from LISP and other languages, where CATCH/THROW had been present for many years. No, it wasn't a new idea, just new to Forth. >An example of the blind leading the blind has to be f/p output. It's plain the >TC had no idea. Had they stuck with the FVG recommendations it wouldn't >have been so bad. But that too presented problems since not even the vendors >behind FVG knew how to implement the functions properly. Somebody (preferably with FP skills and knowledge) just has to step forward. >Certainly ANS was a big effort which required "managing". Elizabeth is a very strong manager. Weak management of a standards body is a problem. 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]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-03 15:59 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <la5g4t$tfd$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #27575 |
Stephen Pelc wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jan 2014 13:27:07 +1100, "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>
> >According to M.Bradley's own comments CATCH/THROW was conceived
> >in a bath tub on the morning of an ANS meeting at which time he floated the
> >idea. He was given the nod and told to go away and produce a spec. That it
> >all worked out without too many issues may have had more to do with good
> >luck and Bradley's skills, than anything the TC did.
>
> The idea for CATCH and THROW came from LISP and other languages, where
> CATCH/THROW had been present for many years. No, it wasn't a new idea,
> just new to Forth.
The names/concept may have come from LISP but the mechanism and
implementation was Bradley's. He had to create a spec for ANS where none
previously existed with no experience to speak of. IMO it was somewhat
over-specified, but that's with hindsight. I'm happy with just the codes -1, -2
and no-one bothers to save the input source AFAIK.
> >An example of the blind leading the blind has to be f/p output. It's plain the
> >TC had no idea. Had they stuck with the FVG recommendations it wouldn't
> >have been so bad. But that too presented problems since not even the vendors
> >behind FVG knew how to implement the functions properly.
>
> Somebody (preferably with FP skills and knowledge) just has to step
> forward.
That particular problem was eventually solved (to my satisfaction at least).
I mention the case as an example of experts being thrown together at a meeting
and told to come up with a solution. It began well enough with string versions
of the FVG functions ...
From BASIS 17 (June 1991) :
12.1.0082 (E.) "Paren-e-dot-paren"
( -- c-addr u )( F: r -- ) or ( r -- c-addr u )
Convert the top number on the floating-point stack to its character
string representation using scientific notation;
<significand><exponent>
where:
<significand> := [-]<digit>.<digits0>
<exponent> := E[-]<digits>
The exact number of digits to the right of the decimal point in the
significand is determined by PLACES.
...
12.1.0084 (F.) "Paren-f-dot-paren"
( -- c-addr u )( F: r -- ) or ( r -- c-addr u )
Convert the top number on the floating-point stack to its character
string representation using fixed point notation:
[-] <digit>.<digits0>
The number of digits after the decimal point is determined by PLACES.
These are essentially what one wants and what most languages since 1950's
Fortran have provided. For reasons I don't know the TC threw them out,
replacing them with a primitive which even C has since abandoned.
Was REPRESENT ever needed? IMO it wasn't necessary and the above
functions would have sufficed. That said, it has made implementing those
functions easier and provided opportunity for niceties. So while I contend
ANS didn't know what it was doing, by twists and turns it has worked out
for the best. Weird or what.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mhx@iae.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-03 00:19 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4a3812ed-d419-4bfc-ae6d-71d68da1e4fd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27617 |
On Friday, January 3, 2014 5:59:01 AM UTC+1, Ed wrote: [..] > Was REPRESENT ever needed? IMO it wasn't necessary and the above > functions would have sufficed. That said, it has made implementing those > functions easier and provided opportunity for niceties. So while I contend > ANS didn't know what it was doing, by twists and turns it has worked out > for the best. Weird or what. Checking the iForth distribution for REPRESENT ... Searching for: REPRESENT floatest.frt(435): -- Compiler/interpreter: FCONSTANT FVARIABLE FLITERAL REPRESENT floatest.frt(442): DUP I FDUP REPRESENT CR floatest.frt(459): OR IF ." REPRESENT FAILED" EXIT ENDIF fpio-test.frt(54): and REPRESENT. miscutil.frt(1236): target MyPad PRECISION 3 + REPRESENT miscutil.frt(1260): MyPad 1 REPRESENT Found 6 occurrence(s) in 1063 files Searching for: REPRESENT C:\dfwforth\examples\ansi\ansify.frt(434): Capitalize: REPRESENT C:\dfwforth\examples\grayo\gray16.frt(147): \ BITS THAT REPRESENT NO ELEMENTS, MUST BE 0 ) C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\color.frt(1020): std REPRESENT NONE fp_ws dpans12.htm 12.6.1.2143 C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\dispfloats.frt(14): \ Does not catch errors from REPRESENT C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\dispfloats.frt(25): FBUF PRECISION REPRESENT DROP SWAP 1- C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\dztest-float.frt(119): testing REPRESENT C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\dztest-float.frt(124): significand string produced by REPRESENT for the input len and C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\dztest-float.frt(127): by REPRESENT, and leave compare?, the significand agreement C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\dztest-float.frt(132): pad r@ + c@ ABORT" ***REPRESENT writes too many characters." C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\dztest-float.frt(135): \ meaning of TEST-REPRESENT neg? output C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\floatemu.frt(305): \ >FLOAT FLITERAL REPRESENT F** F. FACOS FACOSH FALOG FASIN FASINH FATAN FATAN2 C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(31): \ needed e.g. if REPRESENT always returns flag2=true or C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(34): \ 4. If your REPRESENT does not return an exponent of +1 C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(40): \ 5. If your REPRESENT does not blank fill the remainder C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(43): \ displayed. Again, this is a bug** in your REPRESENT. C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(62): CREATE FBUF \ REPRESENT buffer C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(71): 0.E0 FBUF 6 REPRESENT 2DROP \ test REPRESENT C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(77): PL# ! FBUF PRECISION REPRESENT >R SN# ! 1- EX# ! C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(84): CR .( Your REPRESENT is buggy and does not return an ) C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(92): \ use this definition if you have a buggy REPRESENT C:\dfwforth\examples\misc\fpout4.frt(96): FILL 1 0 TRUE ELSE FBUF PRECISION REPRESENT THEN C:\dfwforth\examples\simulati\vitl\condense.frt(41): PAD 4 REPRESENT C:\dfwforth\examples\simulati\vitl\hftl.frt(537): PAD 4 REPRESENT Found 23 occurrence(s) in 11,213 files In about 12,000 files there are only 3 significant occurrences (the rest are tests). On the other hand, without REPRESENT it would not have been possible to build the word F.N1, which I use all of the time. It should be said that iForth has (F.) and (E.), driving down use of the cumbersome REPRESENT. Number formatting is a significant part of most programs I write. -marcel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 15 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15] 16 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web