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 8 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 17 Next page →
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 08:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Jan9.092805@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #27739 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>On 1/8/14 5:24 AM, Anton Ertl wrote:
>> "All the programming facilities and conveniences" includes, in
>> particular, that there is no language-specified line between
>> compilation and run-time; yet in such a cross-compilation system you
>> have this separation in two ways: The separation between target and
>> host, and the separation between development time (when the host is
>> connected to the target) and use time (when the target is on its own).
>
>Operationally, that line is not so major. When you're connected to a
>target, you can type in a definition and execute it, examine target
>memory, do practically anything without special procedures. When your
>target is fully tested, you unplug the umbilical. That's it. I think
>you've never tried one, and are imagining difficulties that don't exist.
I have never tried one, true. Maybe such systems know automatically
which of the data and code of, say, the parser generator Gray should
be put on the host, the target, or both, but I doubt it.
>I see a lot of people using BUFFER: on resident Forths. For many years
>we took flack for not having a word that defines an array, and had to
>defensively show how easy it is to build an array with CREATE/ALLOT. A
>lot of people are happy with BUFFER: as a general capability.
Maybe, but given how easy it is to implement BUFFER: with CREATE and
ALLOT, I have my doubts that it would have been standardized if the
edge case did not exist.
- 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 | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-08 16:21 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <jpGdnScHTtjIUlDPnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27736 |
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>With the advent of microcontrollers, the Forth community has developed >>appropriate support systems including interactive cross-compilers that >>provide all the programming facilities and conveniences of a resident >>Forth even for very limited targets. > > "All the programming facilities and conveniences" includes, in > particular, that there is no language-specified line between > compilation and run-time; yet in such a cross-compilation system you > have this separation in two ways: The separation between target and > host, and the separation between development time (when the host is > connected to the target) and use time (when the target is on its > own). That second one isn't a property of the cross-compilation system, but of embedded development. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 09:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Jan9.103932@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #27742 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>> "All the programming facilities and conveniences" includes, in
>> particular, that there is no language-specified line between
>> compilation and run-time; yet in such a cross-compilation system you
>> have this separation in two ways: The separation between target and
>> host, and the separation between development time (when the host is
>> connected to the target) and use time (when the target is on its
>> own).
>
>That second one isn't a property of the cross-compilation system, but
>of embedded development.
As soon as the developer and the user differ, that's a property of any
development. But in Forth that's not reflected in the language; the
programmer can use all language facilities at development time and at
use time, so the boundary between these times can be shifted easily,
and the same code can be useful for both times. That's not true for
cross-compilation systems.
- 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 | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 04:28 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <gdudnW5X5ZdD5FPPnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27751 |
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: >>> "All the programming facilities and conveniences" includes, in >>> particular, that there is no language-specified line between >>> compilation and run-time; yet in such a cross-compilation system you >>> have this separation in two ways: The separation between target and >>> host, and the separation between development time (when the host is >>> connected to the target) and use time (when the target is on its >>> own). >> >>That second one isn't a property of the cross-compilation system, but >>of embedded development. > > As soon as the developer and the user differ, that's a property of > any development. But in Forth that's not reflected in the language; > the programmer can use all language facilities at development time > and at use time, so the boundary between these times can be shifted > easily, and the same code can be useful for both times. That's not > true for cross-compilation systems. In what sense? What are these things that can't be done? Embedded systems are often resource-constrained, and a correctly-sized system for embedded developement won't have that much wasted RAM. If you're using a "conventional" interactive Forth you'll run out of memory on the target long before you run out of memory for the application. Unblilical systems have a very small overhead, and mean that you are working in an environment that is as close as possible to the actual target system. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 11:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Jan9.122749@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #27753 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>>>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>>>> "All the programming facilities and conveniences" includes, in
>>>> particular, that there is no language-specified line between
>>>> compilation and run-time; yet in such a cross-compilation system you
>>>> have this separation in two ways: The separation between target and
>>>> host, and the separation between development time (when the host is
>>>> connected to the target) and use time (when the target is on its
>>>> own).
>>>
>>>That second one isn't a property of the cross-compilation system, but
>>>of embedded development.
>>
>> As soon as the developer and the user differ, that's a property of
>> any development. But in Forth that's not reflected in the language;
>> the programmer can use all language facilities at development time
>> and at use time, so the boundary between these times can be shifted
>> easily, and the same code can be useful for both times. That's not
>> true for cross-compilation systems.
>
>In what sense? What are these things that can't be done?
Consider the parser generator Gray. Nothing in the program says what
parts are on the host and what are on the target, what runs at
develpment time and what runs at use time. And if you want to add
such separation, what you would add depends on the way that it is
used. In any case, that's not "all the programming facilities and
conveniences of a resident Forth".
>Embedded systems are often resource-constrained, and a correctly-sized
>system for embedded developement won't have that much wasted RAM. If
>you're using a "conventional" interactive Forth you'll run out of
>memory on the target long before you run out of memory for the
>application. Unblilical systems have a very small overhead, and mean
>that you are working in an environment that is as close as possible to
>the actual target system.
Sure, if you want the minimal hardware for your application, you may
be willing to forego some of the benefits of a full Forth system and
make do with a cross-development system, but that does not make a full
Forth system "exceedingly odd".
- 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 | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 14:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lam90m$f9j$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #27758 |
Anton Ertl wrote: >>Embedded systems are often resource-constrained, and a correctly-sized >>system for embedded developement won't have that much wasted RAM. If >>you're using a "conventional" interactive Forth you'll run out of >>memory on the target long before you run out of memory for the >>application. Unblilical systems have a very small overhead, and mean >>that you are working in an environment that is as close as possible to >>the actual target system. > > Sure, if you want the minimal hardware for your application, you may > be willing to forego some of the benefits of a full Forth system and > make do with a cross-development system, but that does not make a full > Forth system "exceedingly odd". Let me throw in some less than hypothetical experience: On systems like the b16, with program binary sizes of usually 2k, I do use cross compiling, and the b16 cross assembler actually contains an umbilical system, i.e. you can interactively upload (and execute) single lines of code. However, this is only Forth-like, not real Forth, and it definitely feels different. On systems with 16k of flash, the constraints are much weaker, and you can actually use the normal interactive programming style, including extending the compiler and such. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 09:41 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <KrednV1RfsTcXlPPnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27763 |
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: > Anton Ertl wrote: > >>>Embedded systems are often resource-constrained, and a correctly-sized >>>system for embedded developement won't have that much wasted RAM. If >>>you're using a "conventional" interactive Forth you'll run out of >>>memory on the target long before you run out of memory for the >>>application. Unblilical systems have a very small overhead, and mean >>>that you are working in an environment that is as close as possible to >>>the actual target system. >> >> Sure, if you want the minimal hardware for your application, you may >> be willing to forego some of the benefits of a full Forth system and >> make do with a cross-development system, but that does not make a full >> Forth system "exceedingly odd". > > Let me throw in some less than hypothetical experience: On systems like the > b16, with program binary sizes of usually 2k, I do use cross compiling, and > the b16 cross assembler actually contains an umbilical system, i.e. you can > interactively upload (and execute) single lines of code. However, this is > only Forth-like, not real Forth, and it definitely feels different. > > On systems with 16k of flash, the constraints are much weaker, and > you can actually use the normal interactive programming style, > including extending the compiler and such. If your cross-compiler doesn't allow you to use the normal interactive programming style and easily to extend the compiler, then you cross-compiler is *broken*. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 18:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lamn6i$6ap$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #27769 |
Andrew Haley wrote: > Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: >> Anton Ertl wrote: >> On systems with 16k of flash, the constraints are much weaker, and >> you can actually use the normal interactive programming style, >> including extending the compiler and such. > > If your cross-compiler doesn't allow you to use the normal interactive > programming style and easily to extend the compiler, then you > cross-compiler is *broken*. Of course the cross compiler is easily extensible, but the extensions are far away from normal Forth style. E.g. if you write a compiler macro in my b16 cross compiler, you say macro: <name> ... end-macro. It's probably that Forth's way to write compiler macros (with normal colon definition, flagged immediate) is actually the broken thing, and the cross compiler syntax is the right thing. However, the b16 cross compiler does not need a target attached; it is for off-line as well as for on-line use. So normally the constraint for a program is that it muss compile off-line. This is not very harmful, as you have a full-blown hosted Forth system to access. There are a number of other things different from a normal Forth; command line execution compiles one line, transfers it to the target, and execute it in total. So you can do all sort of control flow stuff you can't do on a normal Forth. Command line mode however is different from programming mode. Given that b16.fs (umbilical cross-compiler) is just a few hundret lines of code, all the differences to standard Forth are there for ease of implementation, and there are a lot of those differences. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 12:35 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <MKOdneCmTet8dlPPnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27771 |
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: > >> Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: >>> Anton Ertl wrote: >>> On systems with 16k of flash, the constraints are much weaker, and >>> you can actually use the normal interactive programming style, >>> including extending the compiler and such. >> >> If your cross-compiler doesn't allow you to use the normal interactive >> programming style and easily to extend the compiler, then you >> cross-compiler is *broken*. > > Of course the cross compiler is easily extensible, but the > extensions are far away from normal Forth style. E.g. if you write > a compiler macro in my b16 cross compiler, you say macro: <name> > ... end-macro. > > It's probably that Forth's way to write compiler macros (with normal > colon definition, flagged immediate) is actually the broken thing, > and the cross compiler syntax is the right thing. > > However, the b16 cross compiler does not need a target attached; it > is for off-line as well as for on-line use. So normally the > constraint for a program is that it muss compile off-line. This is > not very harmful, as you have a full-blown hosted Forth system to > access. Sure. > There are a number of other things different from a normal Forth; > command line execution compiles one line, transfers it to the > target, and execute it in total. So you can do all sort of control > flow stuff you can't do on a normal Forth. Command line mode > however is different from programming mode. I refer you again to my article of 1988, which explains (IMO, YMMV) the right way to do it, and doesn't require a "command line mode". Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 00:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lanare$6al$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #27773 |
Andrew Haley wrote: > I refer you again to my article of 1988, which explains (IMO, YMMV) > the right way to do it, and doesn't require a "command line mode". Do you have it online somewhere? 1988 is a bit old ;-). The "command line mode" of the b16 cross compiler is a one-liner, so the tradeoffs made here was the shortest possible code that could give an interactive command line. The whole b16 project was started to find out how Chuck's new ideas fit in, and accept significant deviations from classical Forth for the sake of simplicy. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 05:22 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <DN2dnYDgAqmSRVLPnZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27775 |
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: > >> I refer you again to my article of 1988, which explains (IMO, YMMV) >> the right way to do it, and doesn't require a "command line mode". > > Do you have it online somewhere? 1988 is a bit old ;-). The "command line > mode" of the b16 cross compiler is a one-liner, so the tradeoffs made here > was the shortest possible code that could give an interactive command line. No, I don't, and it is a bit old. Twenty-five years ago, sigh. :-) I'll explain it. Let's say the aim is to be able to run an interactive cross-compiler with no separate command line mode. It's just normal Forth interaction, as closely as possible, but with cross-compiled code. So, the aim is to be able to do: : foo + ; 1 2 foo . 3 ok This is how it works: : is a cross-compiler word which is executed on the host and generates target code into a buffer. : also defines a dictionary entry for foo on the host. This is normal cross-compiler stuff. What's different is that if the target is online we also download the code as we go along, if that's possible. 1 and 2 are not found as words, so are converted to numbers by the host. foo is found on the host. Its runtime host action is to copy the stack from the host to the target, tell the target to execute its code for foo, and return the stack. . is not found on the target. It is executed on the host. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 03:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <60ff5570-371b-45e8-a634-fe6555535f11@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27776 |
On Friday, January 10, 2014 12:22:55 PM UTC+1, Andrew Haley wrote: > Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: [..] > Let's say the aim is to be able to run an interactive cross-compiler > with no separate command line mode. > It's just normal Forth interaction, as closely as possible, > but with cross-compiled code. So, the aim is to be able to do: > : foo + ; 1 2 foo . 3 ok This is how it works: [..] What about: ' foo execute (First: I assume that both host and target have EXECUTE . Second: note that the stack is empty). Another question: here 3 , 4 , c@ emit ( or 100 dump ) -marcel -marcel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 09:31 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <sdmdnQ9wRaDIj03PnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27777 |
m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl wrote: > On Friday, January 10, 2014 12:22:55 PM UTC+1, Andrew Haley wrote: >> Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: >> Andrew Haley wrote: > [..] >> Let's say the aim is to be able to run an interactive cross-compiler >> with no separate command line mode. >> It's just normal Forth interaction, as closely as possible, >> but with cross-compiled code. So, the aim is to be able to do: >> : foo + ; 1 2 foo . 3 ok This is how it works: > [..] > > What about: ' foo execute (First: I assume that both host and > target have EXECUTE . Second: note that the stack is empty). The host has a ' for target words which returns the correct address for the target's EXECUTE . > Another question: here 3 , 4 , c@ emit ( or 100 dump ) Again, the host has a HERE that returns HERE for the target, i.e. the one that , uses. And there is a DUMP that dumps target memory. There are some scenarios where some assistance is required from the user: for instance, if you want a version of : that creates a word on the host, you'll have to say HOST : . But this is all normal Forth cross-compiler stuff. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 09:40 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <KrednSJRfsR2X1PPnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27758 |
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: >>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>>>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: >>>>> "All the programming facilities and conveniences" includes, in >>>>> particular, that there is no language-specified line between >>>>> compilation and run-time; yet in such a cross-compilation system >>>>> you have this separation in two ways: The separation between >>>>> target and host, and the separation between development time >>>>> (when the host is connected to the target) and use time (when >>>>> the target is on its own). >>>> >>>>That second one isn't a property of the cross-compilation system, but >>>>of embedded development. >>> >>> As soon as the developer and the user differ, that's a property of >>> any development. But in Forth that's not reflected in the language; >>> the programmer can use all language facilities at development time >>> and at use time, so the boundary between these times can be shifted >>> easily, and the same code can be useful for both times. That's not >>> true for cross-compilation systems. >> >>In what sense? What are these things that can't be done? > > Consider the parser generator Gray. Nothing in the program says what > parts are on the host and what are on the target, what runs at > develpment time and what runs at use time. And if you want to add > such separation, what you would add depends on the way that it is > used. In any case, that's not "all the programming facilities and > conveniences of a resident Forth". I see what you mean. I don't think I ever said that no changes would be required to code. >>Embedded systems are often resource-constrained, and a correctly-sized >>system for embedded developement won't have that much wasted RAM. If >>you're using a "conventional" interactive Forth you'll run out of >>memory on the target long before you run out of memory for the >>application. Unblilical systems have a very small overhead, and mean >>that you are working in an environment that is as close as possible to >>the actual target system. > > Sure, if you want the minimal hardware for your application, you may > be willing to forego some of the benefits of a full Forth system and > make do with a cross-development system, but that does not make a > full Forth system "exceedingly odd". It makes it an exceedingly odd *choice* for those of us who have used (and love) umbilical Forths. Having been involved in developing such systems in 1988 and having described the techniques to eveyone who would listen, I still look on with blank amazement at people who develop on small embedded systems and don't use them. As Elizabeth says, it's a far better and more enjoyable environment than running a full Forth system down there and taklking to it over a serial link. In that sense, you aren't foregoing anything. The time taken to port stuff to such an environment (if any) is IME much less than what you gain from having a much nicer (IMO, YMMV, etc.) system to use. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 21:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <12f05881-1ac4-45f1-b476-0179540c6e27@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27648 |
On Friday, January 3, 2014 1:03:17 PM UTC-5, Andrew Haley wrote: > No, only if you are doing something exceedingly odd: interactively > programming a system, with no cross compiler, with the dictionary in > flash. Sure, you can do that, but I can't think of any reason that > anyone would do it... > Andrew. Hard to believe, but this is where Forth came from: Forth is an Operating System. Seems to be some people don't understand. It is very important for Forth in education to have everything on the target, so you may add a display and a keypad and you have a totally independent system. Interactively programming the system is the key, and you don't need a cross compiler! The dictionary in flash is a must! That's back to the roots, and it works! This is for educational purposes. In a professional system things are different, in a professional system high productivity tools are a must.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 03:41 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <m8WdnUQxu5JajEzPnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27791 |
visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote: > It is very important for Forth in education to have everything on > the target, so you may add a display and a keypad and you have a > totally independent system. Interactively programming the system is > the key, and you don't need a cross compiler! The dictionary in > flash is a must! That's back to the roots, and it works! > > This is for educational purposes. In a professional system things > are different, in a professional system high productivity tools are > a must. I'm not sure you do learners any favours by making them use low productivity tools. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 13:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52d1482d$0$25253$e4fe514c@dreader34.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #27800 |
In article <m8WdnUQxu5JajEzPnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@supernews.com>,
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote:
>visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote:
>
>> It is very important for Forth in education to have everything on
>> the target, so you may add a display and a keypad and you have a
>> totally independent system. Interactively programming the system is
>> the key, and you don't need a cross compiler! The dictionary in
>> flash is a must! That's back to the roots, and it works!
>>
>> This is for educational purposes. In a professional system things
>> are different, in a professional system high productivity tools are
>> a must.
>
>I'm not sure you do learners any favours by making them use low
>productivity tools.
High productivity tools come with a learning curve.
The investment versus results lay exactly opposite in education.
Very low investment in understanding for a moderate accomplishment.
{costs are probably higher too]
>
>Andrew.
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 | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 11:44 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e9e82a00-d9fb-4c84-88a2-88ee90961a7e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #27800 |
On Saturday, January 11, 2014 4:41:27 AM UTC-5, Andrew Haley wrote: > visualforth.com wrote: >> It is very important for Forth in education to have everything on >> the target, so you may add a display and a keypad and you have a >> totally independent system. Interactively programming the system is >> the key, and you don't need a cross compiler! The dictionary in >> flash is a must! That's back to the roots, and it works! > >> This is for educational purposes. In a professional system things >> are different, in a professional system high productivity tools are > > a must. > > I'm not sure you do learners any favours by making them use low > productivity tools. > Andrew. Forth is a highly productive tool and Forth is amplifying the abilities of the programmer. That's why Forth is a good point to start with in programming education, let's say in K-12. If somebody gets good results, programming may be his profession in perspective - if somebody likes to be a programmer and doesn't get anything useful done in Forth, then the best advice would be to choose another professional direction.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 10:40 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <hLKdnT1U3tjHMUzPnZ2dnUVZ_o6dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27820 |
On 1/11/14 9:44 AM, visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, January 11, 2014 4:41:27 AM UTC-5, Andrew Haley wrote: >> visualforth.com wrote: > >>> It is very important for Forth in education to have everything on >>> the target, so you may add a display and a keypad and you have a >>> totally independent system. Interactively programming the system is >>> the key, and you don't need a cross compiler! The dictionary in >>> flash is a must! That's back to the roots, and it works! >> >>> This is for educational purposes. In a professional system things >>> are different, in a professional system high productivity tools are >>> a must. >> >> I'm not sure you do learners any favours by making them use low >> productivity tools. >> Andrew. > > Forth is a highly productive tool and Forth is amplifying the abilities > of the programmer. That's why Forth is a good point to start with > in programming education, let's say in K-12. If somebody gets good > results, programming may be his profession in perspective - if somebody > likes to be a programmer and doesn't get anything useful done in Forth, > then the best advice would be to choose another professional direction. > Absolutely true, but some Forth environments are easier to use than others. If someone's first exposure to Forth is on a hard-to-use implementation the lesson will be "Forth is hard to use." 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 | 2014-01-11 04:11 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <doOdnQrmscNVhUzPnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #27791 |
visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote: > On Friday, January 3, 2014 1:03:17 PM UTC-5, Andrew Haley wrote: >> No, only if you are doing something exceedingly odd: interactively >> programming a system, with no cross compiler, with the dictionary in >> flash. Sure, you can do that, but I can't think of any reason that >> anyone would do it... > > Hard to believe, but this is where Forth came from: > Forth is an Operating System. > Seems to be some people don't understand. Furthermore, I understand perfectly well: it was fairly standard to run a resident Forth on small systems when I wrote the 1988 article. The problem was that they were't as productive a programming environment as PCs and that precious target memory was wasted on the parts of Forth needed for interaction but not the application. One solution was to write and debug the program on a PC, but then you'd have to emulate parts of the system and the emulation was always imperfect. I always disliked that, and much preferred to do all the development on the real hardware. Also, the real product as shipped was unlikely to have enough spare memory to run a full interactive system so if anything went wrong in the field you wouldn't be able to debug the system. Our desire was a programming environment that was just as productive and enjoyable as Forth on a PC even when programming the smallest microcontroller. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web