Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #30165 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-05-07 13:06 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-05-07 20:01 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 155 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
gforth too bloated ? Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 13:06 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-07 13:31 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-08 00:10 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-07 23:21 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-05-08 04:07 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-08 14:21 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-09 17:36 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? dambere@web.de - 2014-05-09 15:01 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-10 00:05 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.invalid> - 2014-05-10 00:30 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-10 09:16 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-10 03:27 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 20:42 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 22:32 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-07 21:06 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-09 04:14 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 13:42 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 11:48 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 15:18 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-09 09:19 -1000
Re: gforth too bloated ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-09 15:30 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-09 13:21 -1000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-10 05:16 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-10 05:28 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-10 10:39 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-10 12:04 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-11 12:10 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bill Long <blongo@gmail.com> - 2014-05-11 13:11 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-11 16:17 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bill Long <blongo@gmail.com> - 2014-05-11 17:10 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-11 08:34 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-11 22:12 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-12 00:38 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-12 00:35 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-11 23:29 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-11 23:37 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-11 23:40 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-12 00:39 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-12 10:20 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-12 05:10 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-13 09:17 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-13 04:28 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-12 03:19 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-13 16:40 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-13 07:56 -1000
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-14 11:52 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-14 08:15 -1000
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-16 16:09 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 09:42 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-16 17:21 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 10:45 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-13 12:56 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-14 12:03 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-14 09:17 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-14 16:50 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2014-05-14 20:26 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-05-14 20:38 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-14 20:02 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-15 14:22 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-15 17:39 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-15 15:03 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-15 15:06 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-15 15:32 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-16 02:13 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-15 20:18 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-16 04:08 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-16 04:28 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 09:23 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-17 07:52 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-17 09:19 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-17 11:51 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Samuel DEVULDER <samuel-dot-devulder-at-laposte-dot-net> - 2014-05-17 22:00 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-16 09:20 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-17 07:54 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-16 15:51 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-05-16 07:59 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-16 13:39 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 01:22 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-16 04:11 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-05-16 15:43 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-05-16 01:26 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-16 03:42 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-16 13:19 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-16 17:59 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-18 13:20 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-18 14:08 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-18 10:07 -1000
Re: gforth too bloated ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-21 21:37 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-05-22 10:06 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-22 10:04 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-05-22 15:39 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-22 13:36 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-20 11:59 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-05-20 07:11 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-20 14:48 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-21 20:27 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-05-22 02:23 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-23 14:51 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-23 13:41 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-21 17:41 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-23 14:41 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-21 17:40 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-23 14:16 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-17 21:09 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-15 03:57 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-15 15:50 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-15 10:07 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-16 16:33 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-17 08:04 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-17 19:03 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-18 04:06 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-19 01:38 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-20 13:38 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-20 21:39 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-21 15:49 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-17 20:30 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-17 17:59 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-18 04:08 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-18 11:07 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-18 11:15 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-18 12:11 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-20 12:36 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-05-20 07:17 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-05-20 16:26 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-20 09:27 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-20 15:48 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-05-20 18:35 +0100
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-21 03:45 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-21 14:28 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-21 11:56 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-21 20:54 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-22 14:06 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-22 17:02 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-23 13:05 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-23 19:19 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-22 14:30 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-22 12:09 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-21 17:22 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-23 14:03 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-05-20 16:57 +0100
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-20 21:28 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-05-20 21:56 +0100
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-21 00:21 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-21 21:42 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-22 02:15 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-23 14:47 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-21 14:12 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-21 21:24 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-10 12:00 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-10 13:16 -0400
Re: gforth too bloated ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-10 11:05 -0700
Re: gforth too bloated ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-10 18:11 -0500
Re: gforth too bloated ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-11 02:12 +0200
Re: gforth too bloated ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-09 16:36 +0000
Re: gforth too bloated ? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2014-05-07 20:01 -0700
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 15:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lkjadd$k5h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #30225 |
On 5/9/2014 3:19 PM, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 5/9/14 7:42 AM, rickman wrote: >> On 5/9/2014 5:14 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 5/7/2014 4:31 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: >>>>> Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> writes: >>>>>> I just read that "gforth is too bloated". >>>>>> That's an honest question : what do you mean by "too bloated" ? >>>> ...snip... >>>>> I like it as a user, but since a lot of it is written in C, it misses >>>>> (it seems to me) some of the technical elegance of a pure metacompiled >>>>> Forth written in Forth. >>>> >>>> Who cares what it is written in? How does that impact your experience >>>> as a user? >>> >>> Because Forth is mutable; the user can change it without needing the >>> help of a high priest. The user is encouraged to understand how it >>> works, because knowledge is power. >> >> So you can't read C code? >> > > Maybe all the other folks in this conversation are good at C, but I am > not, and I know quite a few excellent Forth programmers without much C > experience. Saying you are not "good" at C and that you could not read C code enough to understand it are two different things. Is that what you are saying, that you can't read C code? -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-09 13:21 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <CqSdnYGNyqp7__DOnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30226 |
On 5/9/14 9:30 AM, rickman wrote: > On 5/9/2014 3:19 PM, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 5/9/14 7:42 AM, rickman wrote: >>> On 5/9/2014 5:14 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>>> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 5/7/2014 4:31 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: >>>>>> Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> writes: >>>>>>> I just read that "gforth is too bloated". >>>>>>> That's an honest question : what do you mean by "too bloated" ? >>>>> ...snip... >>>>>> I like it as a user, but since a lot of it is written in C, it misses >>>>>> (it seems to me) some of the technical elegance of a pure >>>>>> metacompiled >>>>>> Forth written in Forth. >>>>> >>>>> Who cares what it is written in? How does that impact your experience >>>>> as a user? >>>> >>>> Because Forth is mutable; the user can change it without needing the >>>> help of a high priest. The user is encouraged to understand how it >>>> works, because knowledge is power. >>> >>> So you can't read C code? >>> >> >> Maybe all the other folks in this conversation are good at C, but I am >> not, and I know quite a few excellent Forth programmers without much C >> experience. > > Saying you are not "good" at C and that you could not read C code enough > to understand it are two different things. Is that what you are saying, > that you can't read C code? That is essentially correct. I have read K&R and some papers, and some years ago was assigned to write a Forth/C comparison article, which I did in conjunction with someone with C experience. To the extent that I once spent time programming other languages (multiple assemblers, Fortran, COBOL, and an Algol variant called Neliac) I can guess some things, but in terms of understanding what's really going on and why it's done that way, no. C is about the same age as Forth. When C came along, I was deeply involved in Forth, and never had an incentive to learn C. Everyone I met who was a C programmer learning Forth told me how much easier Forth was for getting results, which was a continuing disincentive :-) 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 | 2014-05-10 05:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <_oedna7rFu8VYfDOnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30219 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > On 5/9/2014 5:14 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 5/7/2014 4:31 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: >>>> Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> writes: >>>>> I just read that "gforth is too bloated". >>>>> That's an honest question : what do you mean by "too bloated" ? >>> ...snip... >>>> I like it as a user, but since a lot of it is written in C, it misses >>>> (it seems to me) some of the technical elegance of a pure metacompiled >>>> Forth written in Forth. >>> >>> Who cares what it is written in? How does that impact your experience >>> as a user? >> >> Because Forth is mutable; the user can change it without needing the >> help of a high priest. The user is encouraged to understand how it >> works, because knowledge is power. > > So you can't read C code? Yes, but that's not the point: it's about control, and about freedom. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-10 05:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dYSdncZm_NehYvDOnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30243 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 5/9/2014 5:14 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 5/7/2014 4:31 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: >>>>> Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> writes: >>>>>> I just read that "gforth is too bloated". >>>>>> That's an honest question : what do you mean by "too bloated" ? >>>> ...snip... >>>>> I like it as a user, but since a lot of it is written in C, it misses >>>>> (it seems to me) some of the technical elegance of a pure metacompiled >>>>> Forth written in Forth. >>>> >>>> Who cares what it is written in? How does that impact your experience >>>> as a user? >>> >>> Because Forth is mutable; the user can change it without needing the >>> help of a high priest. The user is encouraged to understand how it >>> works, because knowledge is power. >> >> So you can't read C code? > > Yes, but that's not the point: it's about control, and about > freedom. This needs a fuller explanation. If you write Forth in not-Forth, and paricularly if you write it in a compiled language like C, then unless you are a C compiler expert there is a substantial (and critical!) part of the implementation that you don't control. You depend on the implementation of that langauge. This isn't just a Forth thing: lisp-in-lisp has the same properties. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-10 10:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014May10.123904@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #30244 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>This needs a fuller explanation. If you write Forth in not-Forth, and
>paricularly if you write it in a compiled language like C, then unless
>you are a C compiler expert there is a substantial (and critical!)
>part of the implementation that you don't control. You depend on the
>implementation of that langauge.
Sure. And if you write a hosted system, you depend on the OS. And if
you call libraries, you depend on the libraries. And there is a
certain risk associated with that, as we see with the change of gcc
into a pure benchmarking compiler.
The alternative is to go the Chuck Moore way: No OS, no software from
anyone else, just a bare Forth on the bare hardware. Somehow even
among Forthers most people don't go that way. Even among colorForth
users, it seems that the hosted variants are as popular as the native
original (probably because the original only works on specific
hardware).
- 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 2014: http://www.euroforth.org/ef14/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-10 12:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <7qadnesZfp6twfPOnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30245 |
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>This needs a fuller explanation. If you write Forth in not-Forth, and >>paricularly if you write it in a compiled language like C, then unless >>you are a C compiler expert there is a substantial (and critical!) >>part of the implementation that you don't control. You depend on the >>implementation of that langauge. > > Sure. And if you write a hosted system, you depend on the OS. And if > you call libraries, you depend on the libraries. Yes, that is certainly true. > And there is a certain risk associated with that, as we see with the > change of gcc into a pure benchmarking compiler. Heh. You just can't resist it. :-) > The alternative is to go the Chuck Moore way: No OS, no software from > anyone else, just a bare Forth on the bare hardware. Right, and I have had the great pleasure of using such systems. But these days the complexity of the hardware and the usefulness of system libraries means a truly standalone Forth is less useful. But this doesn't reduce the advantage of Forth-in-Forth, of course. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 12:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014May11.141024@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #30264 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>> The alternative is to go the Chuck Moore way: No OS, no software from
>> anyone else, just a bare Forth on the bare hardware.
>
>Right, and I have had the great pleasure of using such systems. But
>these days the complexity of the hardware and the usefulness of system
>libraries means a truly standalone Forth is less useful.
And the bare-hardware approach also has it's risks. When we started
Gforth, we were working on DecStations (little-endian MIPS
architecture) and HPPA machines. HPPA is dead, and MIPS has retreated
to some niches in the embedded market (and little-endian MIPS is no
longer used AFAIK). The rest of the hardware of these machines died
even sooner, and in any case, hardly anybody would boot such a machine
into a bare-metal mode to run a Forth system.
Similarly, I guess that bare-metal colorForth does not run on
contemporary PC hardware. One can then follow the path of Chuck Moore
and do you own hardware, but then there is the next dependency: his
work depends on specific chip-making processes, and they are replaced
by more advanced ones after a few years and eventually phased out.
I guess the next step would be to build your own chip fab, but even
Chuck Moore has not gone there.
>But this doesn't reduce the advantage of Forth-in-Forth, of course.
For simple systems like eForth, yes. For complex ones like Gforth, I
have my doubts. E.g., the primitive generator prims2x.fs is written
in Forth , but I don't have the impression that this has inspired
anyone to tinker with it. The cross-compiler is also written in
Forth, and even I don't touch it (and avoid dealing with it if I can).
- 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 2014: http://www.euroforth.org/ef14/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Long <blongo@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 13:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lknsuh$444$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #30288 |
On 2014-05-11, Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: >>> The alternative is to go the Chuck Moore way: No OS, no software from >>> anyone else, just a bare Forth on the bare hardware. >> >>Right, and I have had the great pleasure of using such systems. But >>these days the complexity of the hardware and the usefulness of system >>libraries means a truly standalone Forth is less useful. > > And the bare-hardware approach also has it's risks. When we started > Gforth, we were working on DecStations (little-endian MIPS > architecture) and HPPA machines. HPPA is dead, and MIPS has retreated > to some niches in the embedded market (and little-endian MIPS is no > longer used AFAIK). It is, in a whole line of open source hardware from Lemote. It runs Linux (gag, ach-tui!) and FreeBSD and OpenBSD. There are laptops, desktops, thin-client type boxes and even servers. Bill -- Long story
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 16:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlmv8lc.g0m.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de> |
| In reply to | #30289 |
On Sun, 11 May 2014 13:11:45 +0000 (UTC), Bill Long <blongo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2014-05-11, Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: >> >> And the bare-hardware approach also has it's risks. When we started >> Gforth, we were working on DecStations (little-endian MIPS >> architecture) and HPPA machines. HPPA is dead, and MIPS has retreated >> to some niches in the embedded market (and little-endian MIPS is no >> longer used AFAIK). > > It is, in a whole line of open source hardware from Lemote. It runs Linux > (gag, ach-tui!) and FreeBSD and OpenBSD. There are laptops, desktops, > thin-client type boxes and even servers. Actually the Loongson processor is a MIPS compatible indigenous Chinese design. But thats just me being pedantic :-) -- Stan Barr plan.b@dsl.pipex.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Long <blongo@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 17:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lkoauk$ad0$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #30295 |
On 2014-05-11, Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> wrote: > On Sun, 11 May 2014 13:11:45 +0000 (UTC), Bill Long <blongo@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 2014-05-11, Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: >>> >>> And the bare-hardware approach also has it's risks. When we started >>> Gforth, we were working on DecStations (little-endian MIPS >>> architecture) and HPPA machines. HPPA is dead, and MIPS has retreated >>> to some niches in the embedded market (and little-endian MIPS is no >>> longer used AFAIK). >> >> It is, in a whole line of open source hardware from Lemote. It runs Linux >> (gag, ach-tui!) and FreeBSD and OpenBSD. There are laptops, desktops, >> thin-client type boxes and even servers. > > Actually the Loongson processor is a MIPS compatible indigenous > Chinese design. But thats just me being pedantic :-) It started out that way but they are now fully licensed MIPS processors. They are as true a MIPS processor as any other licensed MIPS processor. Bill -- To make a Long story short
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 08:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7xha4w72jb.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #30288 |
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: > When we started Gforth, we were working on DecStations (little-endian > MIPS architecture) and HPPA machines. HPPA is dead, and MIPS has > retreated... Similarly, I guess that bare-metal colorForth does not > run on contemporary PC hardware. I wonder if modern computers are harder to port to than the historical minicomputers that Forth evolved on, as there is more hardware complexity to deal with now. In the old days one of Forth's selling points was that porting was pretty easy. > [Chuck Moore] do you own hardware... but then there is the next > dependency: his work depends on specific chip-making processes, IIRC they were able to migrate the GA processor from a 180nm process (GA4, GA144) to 130nm (GA32) and they had chosen 180nm for the GA144 due to its low leakage current. > I guess the next step would be to build your own chip fab, but even > Chuck Moore has not gone there. https://code.google.com/p/homecmos/ ;-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 22:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lkolik$3l4$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #30292 |
Paul Rubin wrote: > anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: >> When we started Gforth, we were working on DecStations (little-endian >> MIPS architecture) and HPPA machines. HPPA is dead, and MIPS has >> retreated... Similarly, I guess that bare-metal colorForth does not >> run on contemporary PC hardware. > > I wonder if modern computers are harder to port to than the historical > minicomputers that Forth evolved on, as there is more hardware > complexity to deal with now. In the old days one of Forth's selling > points was that porting was pretty easy. Sure, the hardware complexity is bigger. But one important thing with Forth is that you solve only the problem at hand, and *not* the general problem. Example: I've just written an Ethernet driver for the Tiva Connected Launchpad (together with Matthias Koch). This is an embedded controller, but the Ethernet part is about as fancy and feature-rich as you would expect on a PC: TCP and IP checksum offload, scatter-gather DMA, etc.. Sounds complicated? Isn't: You figure out how to get this thing working in *one* mode, because all those many modes aren't really necessary, and most of them won't work anyways (we quickly found undocumented bugs). The Forth code uses ~10 of the ~100 registers, and after setup is completed only writes into the circular DMA descriptor array (and clears the interrupt flags in the IRQ). One of the key success stories of Forth was OpenFirmware. This always did run on the most complex workstations you could get: SPARCstations, POWER from IBM, not simple, stripped down stuff. And yet, Forth did run on these things before the C people got the first "Hello World!" to run. The typical situation with a Forth driver is that is way, way shorter than the documentation of the part you write it for. This is not limited to e.g. the Ethernet driver as such; when I look at my ARP code, it is way shorter than the description of the ARP protocol on Wikipedia. And ARP is a pretty simple protocol, simple enough to be described in a Wikipedia page ;-). -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-12 00:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <53701822$0$2940$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #30292 |
In article <7xha4w72jb.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: >anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: >> When we started Gforth, we were working on DecStations (little-endian >> MIPS architecture) and HPPA machines. HPPA is dead, and MIPS has >> retreated... Similarly, I guess that bare-metal colorForth does not >> run on contemporary PC hardware. > >I wonder if modern computers are harder to port to than the historical >minicomputers that Forth evolved on, as there is more hardware >complexity to deal with now. In the old days one of Forth's selling >points was that porting was pretty easy. It is not the Forth itself that is the problem. You can always restrict your Pentium to a subset that was there in the 8086. It is the booting. The Bioses are encrypted and you program needs Bill permission to boot. 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 | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-12 00:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <53701735$0$2940$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #30288 |
In article <2014May11.141024@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>, Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: <SNIP> > >Similarly, I guess that bare-metal colorForth does not run on >contemporary PC hardware. One can then follow the path of Chuck Moore >and do you own hardware, but then there is the next dependency: his >work depends on specific chip-making processes, and they are replaced >by more advanced ones after a few years and eventually phased out. colorforth run on at most one in three PC's *of the time*. Native colorforth requires a floppy drive that most PC nowadays don't have. >- anton Groetjes Albert <SNIP> -- 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 | Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 23:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <28005ca7-acd1-4a87-843c-adae70739db0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30303 |
Hi Albert, > colorforth run on at most one in three PC's *of the time*. My colorForth distro http://www.inventio.co.uk/cfdos.htm runs on every PC that I can find, with the proviso that it has a built-in floppy drive, supports a VESA 1024x768x16 display and 32M bytes of RAM. > Native colorforth requires a floppy drive that most PC nowadays don't > have. John Commeau's version uses the BIOS for disk access, so runs on hardware without a real floppy drive. One day I would like to find the time to merge John's BIOS disk code into my distro, until then I compromised and provided a Bochs version... BTW AFAIK booting on a PC is not a big issue - I've not come across encrypted BIOS's yet - maybe my hardware is still too old (currently Intel i3 64 bit). The problem is no worse for colorForth than "live" Linuces. I would also like to add USB support to my colorForth distro... "You gotta have a dream, if you don't have a dream, How you gonna have a dream come true?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy5Mj7bxTxU Best regards, Howerd On Monday, 12 May 2014 01:35:01 UTC+1, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <2014May11.......@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>, > > Anton Ertl <....@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > > <SNIP> > > > > > >Similarly, I guess that bare-metal colorForth does not run on > > >contemporary PC hardware. One can then follow the path of Chuck Moore > > >and do you own hardware, but then there is the next dependency: his > > >work depends on specific chip-making processes, and they are replaced > > >by more advanced ones after a few years and eventually phased out. > > > > colorforth run on at most one in three PC's *of the time*. > > Native colorforth requires a floppy drive that most PC nowadays don't > > have. > > > > >- anton > > > > Groetjes Albert > > > > <SNIP> > > -- > > 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 | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 23:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7x7g5r8puk.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #30306 |
Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > My colorForth distro http://www.inventio.co.uk/cfdos.htm runs on every > PC that I can find, with the proviso that it has a built-in floppy > drive, supports a VESA 1024x768x16 display and 32M bytes of RAM. I wonder if it could run under QEMU such as in KVM virtualization. I know there is Bochs but that is way slow.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-11 23:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <081ac4d6-fb74-4895-98aa-73bd2dcbebed@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30307 |
Hi Paul, I looked at QEMU, but chose Bochs because I could supply the whole system to runs straight out of the "bochs" - QEMU has to be installed with IIRC a 100MB download. Best regards, Howerd On Monday, 12 May 2014 07:37:23 UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote: > Howerd <...@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > > > My colorForth distro http://www.inventio.co.uk/cfdos.htm runs on every > > > PC that I can find, with the proviso that it has a built-in floppy > > > drive, supports a VESA 1024x768x16 display and 32M bytes of RAM. > > > > I wonder if it could run under QEMU such as in KVM virtualization. > > I know there is Bochs but that is way slow.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-12 00:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7x4n0vphro.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #30308 |
Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> writes: > I looked at QEMU, but chose Bochs because I could supply the whole > system to runs straight out of the "bochs" - QEMU has to be installed > with IIRC a 100MB download. You get QEMU automatically if you run KVM or Vagrant or the like. You can rent a KVM virtual server for a few $ per month, though the idea of running Colorforth on a server seems humorous now that I think about it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-12 10:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5370a07f$0$27152$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #30306 |
In article <28005ca7-acd1-4a87-843c-adae70739db0@googlegroups.com>, Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >Hi Albert, > >> colorforth run on at most one in three PC's *of the time*. >My colorForth distro http://www.inventio.co.uk/cfdos.htm >runs on every PC that I can find, with the proviso that it has a >built-in floppy drive, supports a VESA 1024x768x16 display and 32M bytes >of RAM. > >> Native colorforth requires a floppy drive that most PC nowadays don't >> have. >John Commeau's version uses the BIOS for disk access, so runs on >hardware without a real floppy drive. >One day I would like to find the time to merge John's BIOS disk code >into my distro, until then I compromised and provided a Bochs version... I intended to use ran, not run. Past tense. (This mistake comes about because I'm not a native speaker.) Surely you've done some work and don't use Chuck's colorforth as is. That was the colorforth I commented about. > >BTW AFAIK booting on a PC is not a big issue - I've not come across >encrypted BIOS's yet - maybe my hardware is still too old (currently >Intel i3 64 bit). >The problem is no worse for colorForth than "live" Linuces. > >I would also like to add USB support to my colorForth distro... I've been looking into USB too. It is hard, but keep going. "Impossible" things have been done in Forth before. > >"You gotta have a dream, if you don't have a dream, >How you gonna have a dream come true?" >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy5Mj7bxTxU > >Best regards, >Howerd > 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 | Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-12 05:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d663ecd2-a269-411d-b26b-f7541e4c69cc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30315 |
Hi Albert, > I intended to use ran, not run. Past tense. >(This mistake comes about because I'm not a native speaker.) Uw Engels is veel beter dan mijn Nederlands, zelfs met de hulp van Google Translate ;-) > Surely you've done some work and don't use Chuck's colorforth as is. Sort of - the colorForth kernel that I distribute is assembled using NASM from sources created by several people, including the late Terry Loveall, who fixed the floppy driver in Chuck's original - that mod is now in Chuck's version too. What I have done is collect together the source files in NASM format that produce an almost identical binary to the color.com on Chuck's website. The differences are mostly due to NASM and MASM ( IIRC ) assembling different code. > That was the colorforth I commented about. The kernel is functionally identical, I believe. My intention was to make colorForth more accessible, by providing a package that you can run on a Windows machine, that assembles and copies to a floppy disk. The cf2010bochs version even has a 64 bit version of NASM :-) I don't like the way Windows and most programs that run on it do their utmost to "tie you in" to that environment. Providing a colorForth package that can create a stand-alone system in just a few clicks, with *everything* included, is my way of bringing a glimpse of simplicity to the wonderful world that is corporate software. > I've been looking into USB too. It is hard, but keep going. Thanks for the encouragement! I am currently (when not chatting on CLF) working on a CDC driver for an MSP430 in SwiftX. USB is monstrously complicated. Sometimes I feel like St. George attacking the USB dragon with a toothpick. Maybe I can tickle it to death ;-) > "Impossible" things have been done in Forth before. Absolutely :-) Best regards, Howerd On Monday, 12 May 2014 11:20:47 UTC+1, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <....@googlegroups.com>, > > Howerd <....@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > >Hi Albert, > > > > > >> colorforth run on at most one in three PC's *of the time*. > > >My colorForth distro http://www.inventio.co.uk/cfdos.htm > > >runs on every PC that I can find, with the proviso that it has a > > >built-in floppy drive, supports a VESA 1024x768x16 display and 32M bytes > > >of RAM. > > > > > >> Native colorforth requires a floppy drive that most PC nowadays don't > > >> have. > > >John Commeau's version uses the BIOS for disk access, so runs on > > >hardware without a real floppy drive. > > >One day I would like to find the time to merge John's BIOS disk code > > >into my distro, until then I compromised and provided a Bochs version... > > > > I intended to use ran, not run. Past tense. (This mistake comes about > > because I'm not a native speaker.) Surely you've done some > > work and don't use Chuck's colorforth as is. That was the colorforth > > I commented about. > > > > > > > >BTW AFAIK booting on a PC is not a big issue - I've not come across > > >encrypted BIOS's yet - maybe my hardware is still too old (currently > > >Intel i3 64 bit). > > >The problem is no worse for colorForth than "live" Linuces. > > > > > >I would also like to add USB support to my colorForth distro... > > > > I've been looking into USB too. It is hard, but keep going. > > "Impossible" things have been done in Forth before. > > > > > > > >"You gotta have a dream, if you don't have a dream, > > >How you gonna have a dream come true?" > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy5Mj7bxTxU > > > > > >Best regards, > > >Howerd > > > > > > > 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]
Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web