Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #30486 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-05-20 09:23 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-05-25 13:27 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 314 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Go Forth And Prosper Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-20 09:23 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-20 10:32 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 09:57 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 03:03 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Julian Fondren <ayrnieu@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 00:40 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 01:01 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 20:35 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-24 19:35 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 19:17 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-24 16:57 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper mhx@iae.nl - 2014-05-25 00:39 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 05:00 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper mhx@iae.nl - 2014-05-25 09:02 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 12:32 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper babruehl@gmail.com - 2014-05-25 12:36 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 15:43 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper mhx@iae.nl - 2014-05-25 13:02 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 13:14 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 13:05 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 17:04 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 15:44 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 12:01 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 17:33 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 18:08 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 23:44 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 23:29 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 11:12 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 11:18 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper mhx@iae.nl - 2014-05-27 15:50 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-05-28 00:12 +0100
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 19:19 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 11:41 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 17:38 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 08:13 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 17:57 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 08:30 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-25 21:44 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 09:01 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-25 22:09 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 10:26 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-25 23:34 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 12:32 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 09:37 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 21:32 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 10:49 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Clyde W. Phillips Jr." <cwpjr02@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 11:40 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 12:13 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 23:41 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 11:03 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 11:24 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-27 00:35 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 15:56 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-27 10:34 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 16:53 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-27 20:43 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 01:57 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-27 10:28 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 23:37 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 17:29 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 10:56 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 11:31 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 12:12 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 12:50 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 15:54 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 13:10 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Clyde W. Phillips Jr." <cwpjr02@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 13:32 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 14:01 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 20:50 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 19:13 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 23:50 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 23:51 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-27 00:03 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 03:19 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-27 00:33 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-27 00:43 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-27 01:18 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 05:18 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-27 00:42 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-26 13:53 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 20:13 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-26 17:34 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 21:49 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-26 20:33 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-26 13:48 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 20:24 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-26 17:44 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 21:01 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-27 00:08 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 12:39 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-27 13:36 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 19:53 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-27 18:11 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 08:57 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-05-29 09:42 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-29 15:03 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-05-30 00:23 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 02:04 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper test <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-05-28 04:54 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-28 10:17 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-28 06:51 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 13:35 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-28 10:43 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 09:19 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 13:41 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 12:20 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-28 13:28 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 17:54 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-28 19:13 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 23:17 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 11:27 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 11:51 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 13:01 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 13:26 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 13:48 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 14:02 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 14:45 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 14:37 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 15:05 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 15:31 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 15:50 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 16:11 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 16:43 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 17:00 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 17:58 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-30 01:31 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 14:15 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:29 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-29 22:47 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 20:24 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-29 23:35 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-29 20:55 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 20:41 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 00:22 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 21:41 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 01:28 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-30 08:33 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 13:05 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-30 11:47 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 13:07 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 14:14 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 21:04 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-30 12:34 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 23:41 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-30 17:27 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 15:05 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 18:15 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-30 17:45 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 21:53 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 19:13 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-30 19:45 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 21:27 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-30 19:39 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-30 11:37 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 20:16 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 21:32 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-05-31 02:49 +0100
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-31 19:15 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:23 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:18 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-30 08:41 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-30 09:53 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-29 09:50 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-29 11:17 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 09:55 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-27 23:26 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-28 04:56 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 09:39 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 09:46 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 10:18 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 10:28 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-28 12:57 -0500
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-28 10:39 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-28 10:47 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 20:45 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper David J <skamolex@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 11:49 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 22:08 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-05-29 09:46 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 13:00 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-05-31 23:07 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-28 06:37 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 20:39 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 16:03 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-27 09:43 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-27 00:45 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-27 12:40 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 11:46 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 12:47 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-27 10:54 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 12:49 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-28 12:52 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 12:24 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 12:28 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 03:21 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 23:33 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 19:08 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 20:15 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-20 11:05 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 16:02 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-20 13:30 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 16:50 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-20 14:12 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 18:54 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-20 17:15 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-20 15:00 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-20 15:13 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-20 17:19 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-20 17:27 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-20 18:26 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-20 18:34 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 21:53 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-20 19:58 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-20 20:03 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-21 01:27 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-21 10:31 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Julian Fondren <ayrnieu@gmail.com> - 2014-05-21 09:07 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper mhx@iae.nl - 2014-05-21 11:46 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-21 15:34 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper mhx@iae.nl - 2014-05-21 11:48 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 21:47 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 18:48 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-22 13:00 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-22 16:47 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-21 00:18 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 18:55 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-21 02:22 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 22:06 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-21 14:26 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-21 17:17 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-21 17:48 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-20 14:41 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-22 12:23 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-05-20 12:12 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-22 11:36 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-22 14:53 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-22 12:12 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-22 15:23 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-22 12:29 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-22 16:51 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-22 13:58 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 01:24 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 01:32 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-22 12:39 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-22 13:00 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-24 09:18 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 18:46 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Clyde W. Phillips Jr." <cwpjr02@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 19:12 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 19:36 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 19:42 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-05-27 23:13 +0100
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 19:19 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-05-28 20:52 +0100
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 22:12 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-29 12:41 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 01:47 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-28 05:20 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-05-28 21:03 +0100
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 22:13 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-28 06:41 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 16:44 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-28 07:49 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 17:01 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-28 15:01 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-28 08:40 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper HaveANiceDay <HaveANiceDay@NoSpam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 20:45 +0200
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 14:53 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-05-28 21:10 +0100
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Hannu Vuolasaho <vuokkosetae@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 23:28 +0300
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-28 17:54 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-05-28 21:01 +0100
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Andy Valencia <vandys@vsta.org> - 2014-05-28 08:00 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-24 21:50 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Hannu Vuolasaho <vuokkosetae@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 14:52 +0300
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 17:45 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 23:47 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Hannu Vuolasaho <vuokkosetae@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 19:41 +0300
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 02:35 -0700
Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-24 21:24 -0400
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-24 17:02 -1000
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-24 21:21 -0700
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-24 22:16 -0700
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-24 21:02 -1000
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-05-25 11:39 +0100
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-25 15:24 +0200
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] mhx@iae.nl - 2014-05-25 09:07 -0700
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-25 14:15 +0000
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] all2001@spambog.com (Wolfgang Allinger) - 2014-05-25 12:48 -0400
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-05-27 23:27 +0100
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2014-05-26 13:08 -0400
Re: Ms Rather attacked, was [Re: Go Forth And Prosper] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-26 07:41 -1000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 19:31 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-25 04:05 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 12:42 +0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 07:50 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-05-22 22:09 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-23 05:08 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-23 09:46 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-23 13:32 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-23 14:26 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 01:20 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-24 08:31 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-24 08:40 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-24 09:50 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-24 21:35 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-05-25 11:25 +0000
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-26 16:20 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-27 06:04 -0500
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 19:01 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Clyde W. Phillips Jr." <cwpjr02@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 19:24 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-24 10:12 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 01:29 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 01:37 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 12:08 -0400
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Clyde W. Phillips Jr." <cwpjr02@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 13:21 -0700
Re: Go Forth And Prosper "Clyde W. Phillips Jr." <cwpjr02@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 13:27 -0700
Page 5 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 16 Next page →
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 17:34 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <M5-dnRplsKZGmhnOnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30799 |
On 5/26/14 5:13 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> It took 9 minutes to compile. Interactive programming is a complete >> farce in such an environment. Not only does all the text have to pass >> down the line, but even the target's compiler is going to be limited >> and slow. > > Well, interactive programming can also mean after the big program is > loaded, you can still interact with the target, poke at registers, make > new colon definitions, etc. I was going to say "overwrite existing > definitions" but the early binding strategy prevents that. I happened > to just see an old paper[1] about token threading resulting in a > late-binding Forth, so maybe that helps interactivity too (see p. 6 > of the paper, under "Experience to date"). > > [1] http://soton.mpeforth.com/flag/jfar/vol2/no4/article3.pdf Yes, but there isn't a tradeoff, here. With a cross-compiler, for example, you have instantaneous compile/download (of the target) even for complex programs (e.g. the GE Digital Energy Sonet and SDH multiplexors) *and* the ability to interact fully with the target, make new colon definitions, etc. You don't have to give up anything. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 21:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7xppiz7rmo.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #30801 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: > Yes, but there isn't a tradeoff, here. With a cross-compiler, for > example, you have instantaneous compile/download (of the target) even > for complex programs (e.g. the GE Digital Energy Sonet and SDH > multiplexors) *and* the ability to interact fully with the target, > make new colon definitions, etc. You don't have to give up anything. I suspect that 9 minute compilation speed you mentioned was due mostly to a slow serial download. A tethered Forth would have to download the compiled code instead, which would be smaller, but even if 10x smaller that's still almost a whole minute. A very slow target cpu could also have been involved, but the ARM Cortex parts today (while slower than PC's) are much faster than old 8-bitters. Now I feel intrigued by the idea of pervasive late binding in Forth. I somehow thought it went against Forth concepts. It's sure nice in interactive Lisp or Python to be able to redefine a function without having to compile the whole program, and all the call sites automatically get the new version.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 20:33 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <TeWdnYA8cIdNrBnOnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30805 |
On 5/26/14 6:49 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> Yes, but there isn't a tradeoff, here. With a cross-compiler, for >> example, you have instantaneous compile/download (of the target) even >> for complex programs (e.g. the GE Digital Energy Sonet and SDH >> multiplexors) *and* the ability to interact fully with the target, >> make new colon definitions, etc. You don't have to give up anything. > > I suspect that 9 minute compilation speed you mentioned was due mostly > to a slow serial download. A tethered Forth would have to download the > compiled code instead, which would be smaller, but even if 10x smaller > that's still almost a whole minute. A very slow target cpu could also > have been involved, but the ARM Cortex parts today (while slower than > PC's) are much faster than old 8-bitters. Well, of course, one mistake is to use serial instead of faster, modern technologies. The first thing we did was put in a 1 Mb line. And several Mb of source can reduce to much less than .1, it's more like .01 given that it's optimized code and no headers (they stay in the host to support interactive debugging). > Now I feel intrigued by the idea of pervasive late binding in Forth. I > somehow thought it went against Forth concepts. It's sure nice in > interactive Lisp or Python to be able to redefine a function without > having to compile the whole program, and all the call sites > automatically get the new version. On the other hand, it's often really nice to redefine a word *without* touching its prev. incarnation. Late binding opens whole new cans of worms we've lived without quite happily. 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 | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 13:48 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <CrmdncfEceVQTx7OnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30781 |
On 5/26/14 10:10 AM, Paul Rubin wrote: ... > In particular I've never been persuaded by the idea that an embedded > board with Forth is a good way for beginners to learn programming. It's > a lot easier to use a desktop Forth for that (if Forth is the right > approach at all). I've programmed several embedded projects (largish > 32-bit targets) and I've generally the programming and testing on a PC > when possible, with the idea of porting to the target platform > afterwards. That is absolutely correct. It's far, far easier to learn Forth on a system with an easy-to-use user interface, easy integration with the editors and other tools you're used to, and lots of helps (such as LOCATE, which we were discussing recently, online docs, etc.). A stripped-down embedded Forth is a very poor learning environment, because a user who is accustomed to PC-level conveniences will feel hamstrung. But if you learn Forth and then find out how much you can do with it on a tiny board, so much the better. 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 | "VisualForth.com" <babruehl@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 20:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bbc321d6-cfbe-42f2-aa7a-1bd986822147@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30792 |
On Monday, May 26, 2014 7:48:28 PM UTC-4, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 5/26/14 10:10 AM, Paul Rubin wrote: > > In particular I've never been persuaded by the idea that an embedded > > board with Forth is a good way for beginners to learn programming. It's > > a lot easier to use a desktop Forth for that (if Forth is the right > > approach at all). > > That is absolutely correct. It's far, far easier to learn Forth on a > system with an easy-to-use user interface, easy integration with the > editors and other tools you're used to, and lots of helps (such as > LOCATE, which we were discussing recently, online docs, etc.). A > stripped-down embedded Forth is a very poor learning environment, > because a user who is accustomed to PC-level conveniences will feel > hamstrung. But if you learn Forth and then find out how much you can do > with it on a tiny board, so much the better. Your approach is great for industrial projects where managers already know the merits of Forth, and to convince people who wrote C programs all their life to use Forth now. But the situation is totally different for newbees who like to play with microprocessors. The thing with Forth is, that Forth is absolutely worthless to learn if you don't have a project. The fundamentals of Forth can be taught on a PC within half a day, but what then? It was a nice experience, but all the others are using C, so this education was in vain. A different thing is helping the Maker Movement reaching their goals. Meanwhile there are several publications which make a point in observing that using C as a programming language - with the Arduino as example - is way to complicated for beginners. They only learn to copy/paste, hoping that it will work somehow. For these people - the people who like to experiment with microprocessor boards, Internet of Things, etc. - Forth is the better choice. The problem is that Forth isn't well known in the Maker Movement, that there are not enough appropriate tutorials for the Maker Movement (don't tell me about Leo Brodie, I like him, but look at the literature which is available en mass for MM and IoT), and as far as I know there are only a few Universities in this world where Forth is taught. Look at FIRST! National Instruments took over, and this is the lost generation for Forth. Forth could have delivered the tools for robotic classes. All this needs a PC as more or less dumb terminal, but Forth has to run on the target. This is the only way to get next generation Forth programmers. Cheers, Dirk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 17:44 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <-qydnbwoobKklxnOnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30800 |
On 5/26/14 5:24 PM, VisualForth.com wrote: > On Monday, May 26, 2014 7:48:28 PM UTC-4, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 5/26/14 10:10 AM, Paul Rubin wrote: >>> In particular I've never been persuaded by the idea that an embedded >>> board with Forth is a good way for beginners to learn programming. It's >>> a lot easier to use a desktop Forth for that (if Forth is the right >>> approach at all). >> >> That is absolutely correct. It's far, far easier to learn Forth on a >> system with an easy-to-use user interface, easy integration with the >> editors and other tools you're used to, and lots of helps (such as >> LOCATE, which we were discussing recently, online docs, etc.). A >> stripped-down embedded Forth is a very poor learning environment, >> because a user who is accustomed to PC-level conveniences will feel >> hamstrung. But if you learn Forth and then find out how much you can do >> with it on a tiny board, so much the better. > > Your approach is great for industrial projects where managers already know the merits of Forth, and to convince people who wrote C programs all their life to use Forth now. > > But the situation is totally different for newbees who like to play with microprocessors. The thing with Forth is, that Forth is absolutely worthless to learn if you don't have a project. The fundamentals of Forth can be taught on a PC within half a day, but what then? It was a nice experience, but all the others are using C, so this education was in vain. > > A different thing is helping the Maker Movement reaching their goals. Meanwhile there are several publications which make a point in observing that using C as a programming language - with the Arduino as example - is way to complicated for beginners. They only learn to copy/paste, hoping that it will work somehow. > > For these people - the people who like to experiment with microprocessor boards, Internet of Things, etc. - Forth is the better choice. > > The problem is that Forth isn't well known in the Maker Movement, that there are not enough appropriate tutorials for the Maker Movement (don't tell me about Leo Brodie, I like him, but look at the literature which is available en mass for MM and IoT), and as far as I know there are only a few Universities in this world where Forth is taught. > > Look at FIRST! National Instruments took over, and this is the lost generation for Forth. Forth could have delivered the tools for robotic classes. > > All this needs a PC as more or less dumb terminal, but Forth has to run on the target. This is the only way to get next generation Forth programmers. Ok, so you're saying your target customer is the Maker Movement. Why do you need a new board for them, why not just make their existing boards easier to use? And, surely, if you're going after unsophisticated newbies you need example drivers for everything? Most of all, what you need is documentation. If you really want to go after this crowd, you need a really good (compact, fast) Forth that is extremely well-documented with a 2014-equivalent of Starting Forth. National Instruments and others have folks that can write tutorials. You need one for *your* product, not one from 40 years ago. And your product needs all the capabilities your competitors have. Your prospective customers will take one look at your product. If it meets their needs, they'll try it. If not, they won't look again next year when you got the bugs out and wrote the docs. Hit the ground ready to go, and make sure you do so with plenty of publicity. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 21:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7x7g57zx7s.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #30802 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: > Ok, so you're saying your target customer is the Maker Movement. Why > do you need a new board for them, why not just make their existing > boards easier to use? You're confusing Dirk with Simon. Simon is making a new board with an ARM. Dirk has been distributing 4e4th on the MSP430 Launchpad. Yes I can see the point if it's targeted at the maker movement who wants to build hardware gizmos (I guess I'm in that category now, as there are a couple of gadgets I want to build). But most people in that movement who have the idea of building a hardware gizmo, have already written code on a PC for something or other, so they're not programming newbies. I can't speak for others but my idea of using an embedded environment like 4e4th is to learn something about hardware, while mostly using my existing programming knowledge and not expecting to expand it by very much.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-27 00:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a83d691d-36bc-4eb5-b843-fd0e2708eff9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30802 |
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 3:44:56 AM UTC, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > Ok, so you're saying your target customer is the Maker Movement. Why do > > you need a new board for them, why not just make their existing boards > > easier to use? From an EE perspective most of the stuff out there is badly designed by folks without a deep understanding of electronics who gave the data sheet a quick once over and slapped something together. Not my cuppa. Arduino is designed by a marketing guy. And it shows. Now I get that the market for good hardware is limited. None the less it would offend my sense of integrity to do anything else. YMMV. So is there a market for what I'm doing? TBD.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David J <skamolex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-27 12:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b402d388-844d-4e70-9251-c5ba2fabcd44@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30792 |
On Monday, May 26, 2014 5:48:28 PM UTC-6, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 5/26/14 10:10 AM, Paul Rubin wrote: > ... > > In particular I've never been persuaded by the idea that an embedded > > board with Forth is a good way for beginners to learn programming. It's > > a lot easier to use a desktop Forth for that (if Forth is the right > > approach at all). I've programmed several embedded projects (largish > > 32-bit targets) and I've generally the programming and testing on a PC > > when possible, with the idea of porting to the target platform > > afterwards. > > That is absolutely correct. It's far, far easier to learn Forth on a > system with an easy-to-use user interface, easy integration with the > editors and other tools you're used to, and lots of helps (such as > LOCATE, which we were discussing recently, online docs, etc.). A > stripped-down embedded Forth is a very poor learning environment, > because a user who is accustomed to PC-level conveniences will feel > hamstrung. But if you learn Forth and then find out how much you can do > with it on a tiny board, so much the better. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth > I must be the exception to all of this. I've wanted to learn FORTH forever. But it wasn't until FORTH was available for a tiny ARM Cortex M0 that I was motivated enough to make a go of it. The two reasons for this are 1) there are better options than FORTH for most other platforms and 2) FORTH (back in the day, anyway) could do too much damage to your expensive platform if (when) you made a mistake. It was too much power on a PC. It was enough rope to hang yourself. Meanwhile, I despise the standard cross-compiler development environment for embedded controllers...IAR EWARM, Keil uVision, CrossWorks, CodeComposerStudio, etc. I've used them all professionally because I have to. I want nothing to do with them at home. They are vastly too big, bulky, slow, cumbersome, ridiculous. So...enter embedded FORTH. There is precious little you can do in FORTH to destroy an ARM Cortex chip, and if you do manage to brick it, you're out about $1. :) Furthermore, no other tool I'm aware of offers so much fun: Quick turn-around, interactive development, low cost, ultra-small size, fast execution, cleverness. For me, it was the ideal learning environment for FORTH. I'm extremely grateful Clyde picked the LPC1114 and put together such a nifty product. (By "better options" I just mean that there are already built-in compilers with full library support for the hardware. I mean why would anyone use anything but C or Python for the RPi? They are already there, and they work perfectly.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-27 13:36 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <PvidnZJ9hqL8vBjOnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30850 |
On 5/27/14 9:39 AM, David J wrote: ... > I must be the exception to all of this. I've wanted to learn FORTH forever. But it wasn't until FORTH was available for a tiny ARM Cortex M0 that I was motivated enough to make a go of it. The two reasons for this are 1) there are better options than FORTH for most other platforms and 2) FORTH (back in the day, anyway) could do too much damage to your expensive platform if (when) you made a mistake. It was too much power on a PC. It was enough rope to hang yourself. What an amazing set of "reasons"! Where on earth did all that come from? I was using Forth on microcontroller development systems starting in about 1976, and PCs from the moment they came out. I never heard of a Forth doing "damage to your expensive platform" and can't even visualize how that could happen. What is "too much power on a PC"? > Meanwhile, I despise the standard cross-compiler development environment for embedded controllers...IAR EWARM, Keil uVision, CrossWorks, CodeComposerStudio, etc. I've used them all professionally because I have to. I want nothing to do with them at home. They are vastly too big, bulky, slow, cumbersome, ridiculous. Yes, I agree with you there, all the way. I'd be interested in your experience with SwiftX (a very different kind of cross-compiler from FORTH, Inc. -- free eval. versions for most microcontrollrs). > So...enter embedded FORTH. There is precious little you can do in FORTH to destroy an ARM Cortex chip, and if you do manage to brick it, you're out about $1. :) Furthermore, no other tool I'm aware of offers so much fun: Quick turn-around, interactive development, low cost, ultra-small size, fast execution, cleverness. Well, again, I never heard of *anything* you can do in Forth to destroy a chip, but I'm glad you're finding it fun! > For me, it was the ideal learning environment for FORTH. I'm extremely grateful Clyde picked the LPC1114 and put together such a nifty product. 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 | David J <skamolex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-27 19:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <de9aa940-4d17-4c7b-b3fc-e474bcc811ea@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30857 |
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 5:36:02 PM UTC-6, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 5/27/14 9:39 AM, David J wrote: > > > I must be the exception to all of this. I've wanted to learn FORTH forever. But it wasn't until FORTH was available for a tiny ARM Cortex M0 that I was motivated enough to make a go of it. The two reasons for this are 1) there are better options than FORTH for most other platforms and 2) FORTH (back in the day, anyway) could do too much damage to your expensive platform if (when) you made a mistake. It was too much power on a PC. It was enough rope to hang yourself. > > What an amazing set of "reasons"! Where on earth did all that come from? > I was using Forth on microcontroller development systems starting in > about 1976, and PCs from the moment they came out. I never heard of a > Forth doing "damage to your expensive platform" and can't even visualize > how that could happen. What is "too much power on a PC"? Easy. Indiscriminate writing to boot blocks, disk controllers, configuration files, registries, etc, will hopelessly scramble a PC. It may be that better protections are built in now. I last considered Forth on a PC back in the DOS and ISA bus days. I paid too much for my PC and had a hard enough time keeping it healthy as it was. Nowadays, I have a bunch of old PCs that I couldn't sell for $5. I'll bet that dedicating one of them to Forth would be a hoot! Nothing to lose at all. But then I think, "Why haul around a giant box when a tiny chip will do the job?" So there it stays. > > Yes, I agree with you there, all the way. I'd be interested in your > experience with SwiftX (a very different kind of cross-compiler from > FORTH, Inc. -- free eval. versions for most microcontrollrs). > I haven't given it a try yet because I'm so enamored of resident Forths. In fact I'm in the process of throwing away the PC entirely, replacing it and TeraTerm with a dedicated terminal, editor, storage device, and serial port - all in one. No Windows. No Linux. No Android. All three OSs have their place - and I use them all - but not in my Forth development platform. > Well, again, I never heard of *anything* you can do in Forth to destroy > a chip, but I'm glad you're finding it fun! Exceeding the device dissipation will toast it pretty quickly. This could happen by accidentally enabling IO pins and causing them to drive against an indomitable force. I have also bricked a 1114 in another way - when flashing went wrong and as a result the internal ROM loader would no longer work. If FlashMagic can no longer find your chip, what else is there to try?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-27 18:11 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <Q7edncKMuLhk_BjOnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #30860 |
On 5/27/14 4:53 PM, David J wrote: > On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 5:36:02 PM UTC-6, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 5/27/14 9:39 AM, David J wrote: >> >>> I must be the exception to all of this. I've wanted to learn FORTH forever. But it wasn't until FORTH was available for a tiny ARM Cortex M0 that I was motivated enough to make a go of it. The two reasons for this are 1) there are better options than FORTH for most other platforms and 2) FORTH (back in the day, anyway) could do too much damage to your expensive platform if (when) you made a mistake. It was too much power on a PC. It was enough rope to hang yourself. >> >> What an amazing set of "reasons"! Where on earth did all that come from? >> I was using Forth on microcontroller development systems starting in >> about 1976, and PCs from the moment they came out. I never heard of a >> Forth doing "damage to your expensive platform" and can't even visualize >> how that could happen. What is "too much power on a PC"? > > Easy. Indiscriminate writing to boot blocks, disk controllers, configuration files, registries, etc, will hopelessly scramble a PC. It may be that better protections are built in now. I last considered Forth on a PC back in the DOS and ISA bus days. I paid too much for my PC and had a hard enough time keeping it healthy as it was. Ok, I just never heard of anyone actually doing that with Forth. > Nowadays, I have a bunch of old PCs that I couldn't sell for $5. I'll bet that dedicating one of them to Forth would be a hoot! Nothing to lose at all. But then I think, "Why haul around a giant box when a tiny chip will do the job?" So there it stays. >> >> Yes, I agree with you there, all the way. I'd be interested in your >> experience with SwiftX (a very different kind of cross-compiler from >> FORTH, Inc. -- free eval. versions for most microcontrollrs). >> > I haven't given it a try yet because I'm so enamored of resident Forths. In fact I'm in the process of throwing away the PC entirely, replacing it and TeraTerm with a dedicated terminal, editor, storage device, and serial port - all in one. No Windows. No Linux. No Android. All three OSs have their place - and I use them all - but not in my Forth development platform. Also ok, but there are tradeoffs. If you can retain all the full target interactivity you have with a resident Forth *and* have a powerful optimizing compiler to generate code that's significantly smaller and faster *and* have powerful editing and debugging tools, what's the downside? >> Well, again, I never heard of *anything* you can do in Forth to destroy >> a chip, but I'm glad you're finding it fun! > > Exceeding the device dissipation will toast it pretty quickly. This could happen by accidentally enabling IO pins and causing them to drive against an indomitable force. I have also bricked a 1114 in another way - when flashing went wrong and as a result the internal ROM loader would no longer work. If FlashMagic can no longer find your chip, what else is there to try? Again, I don't see how this is any more likely with Forth than anything else you might 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 | David J <skamolex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-28 08:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e836fe5d-8148-472d-bbfe-de2c30eb5531@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30864 |
> > Exceeding the device dissipation will toast it pretty quickly. This could happen by accidentally enabling IO pins and causing them to drive against an indomitable force. I have also bricked a 1114 in another way - when flashing went wrong and as a result the internal ROM loader would no longer work. If FlashMagic can no longer find your chip, what else is there to try? > > Again, I don't see how this is any more likely with Forth than anything > else you might use. Agreed. Although for *me* it may be more likely only because I'm a Forth novice. But my point is that the chip is so cheap that even if I lose one or two along the way, I'm out practically nothing. I really like that feeling. :) > If you can retain all the full target > interactivity you have with a resident Forth *and* have a powerful > optimizing compiler to generate code that's significantly smaller and > faster *and* have powerful editing and debugging tools, what's the downside? Generating smaller and faster code are compelling reasons to give SwiftX a try. I have a few LPC1768 boards. Perhaps I'll do just that...see what I'm missing. :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 09:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5387009a.80421651@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #30897 |
On Wed, 28 May 2014 08:57:48 -0700 (PDT), David J <skamolex@gmail.com> wrote: >Generating smaller and faster code are compelling reasons to give SwiftX a = >try. I have a few LPC1768 boards. Perhaps I'll do just that...see what I'= >m missing. :) For small code and high performance, the MPE ARM/Cortex compilers are available at no cost for non-commercial use. See: http://www.mpeforth.com/xc7lite.htm Stephen -- Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time 133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691 web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David J <skamolex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-29 15:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <13a8f904-3a4d-4f10-8692-35c80803733b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30941 |
On Thursday, May 29, 2014 3:42:28 AM UTC-6, Stephen Pelc wrote: > On Wed, 28 May 2014 08:57:48 -0700 (PDT), David J <gmail.com> > wrote: > >Generating smaller and faster code are compelling reasons to give SwiftX a = > >try. I have a few LPC1768 boards. Perhaps I'll do just that...see what I'= > >m missing. :) > For small code and high performance, the MPE ARM/Cortex compilers are > available at no cost for non-commercial use. See: > http://www.mpeforth.com/xc7lite.htm Thanks, Stephen! Is the lite version available for more than the MSP430G2553 and the STM32F072RB? I have several LPC1343 chips on Olimex header boards that could use some Forth love.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-30 00:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5387ccb4.132670987@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #30965 |
On Thu, 29 May 2014 15:03:23 -0700 (PDT), David J <skamolex@gmail.com> wrote: >Is the lite version available for more than the MSP430G2553 and the STM32F072RB? >I have several LPC1343 chips on Olimex header boards that could use some Forth love. We'll add more boards as we go along. The STM32 boards are about US$ 10 each, so they are in the pocket money class. It's really not that hard to do a port yourself, just a bit daunting. It's a matter of testing one thing at a time. For the Cortex parts there's no assembler in the start up code. The next release will include a simple "blinky" example - look, ma, no assembler. Stephen -- Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time 133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691 web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-28 02:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lm3ua3$q7m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #30860 |
On 5/27/2014 10:53 PM, David J wrote: > On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 5:36:02 PM UTC-6, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 5/27/14 9:39 AM, David J wrote: >> >>> I must be the exception to all of this. I've wanted to learn FORTH forever. But it wasn't until FORTH was available for a tiny ARM Cortex M0 that I was motivated enough to make a go of it. The two reasons for this are 1) there are better options than FORTH for most other platforms and 2) FORTH (back in the day, anyway) could do too much damage to your expensive platform if (when) you made a mistake. It was too much power on a PC. It was enough rope to hang yourself. >> >> What an amazing set of "reasons"! Where on earth did all that come from? >> I was using Forth on microcontroller development systems starting in >> about 1976, and PCs from the moment they came out. I never heard of a >> Forth doing "damage to your expensive platform" and can't even visualize >> how that could happen. What is "too much power on a PC"? > > Easy. Indiscriminate writing to boot blocks, disk controllers, configuration files, registries, etc, will hopelessly scramble a PC. It may be that better protections are built in now. I last considered Forth on a PC back in the DOS and ISA bus days. I paid too much for my PC and had a hard enough time keeping it healthy as it was. > > Nowadays, I have a bunch of old PCs that I couldn't sell for $5. I'll bet that dedicating one of them to Forth would be a hoot! Nothing to lose at all. But then I think, "Why haul around a giant box when a tiny chip will do the job?" So there it stays. Well there you go. You are talking DOS which is about the equivalent of the sort of rudimentary OS they use on single chip micros these days or in other words, similar to using a library instead of an OS. The only difference is that an OS like DOS gives you a UI. Any current OS will provide all manner of protections from errant programs trashing your computer. I won't say it is impossible, but really, is that the reason you don't want to use Forth on a PC? I have done damage on my PC running Thunderbird too. Any program is able to trash files. >> Yes, I agree with you there, all the way. I'd be interested in your >> experience with SwiftX (a very different kind of cross-compiler from >> FORTH, Inc. -- free eval. versions for most microcontrollrs). >> > I haven't given it a try yet because I'm so enamored of resident Forths. In fact I'm in the process of throwing away the PC entirely, replacing it and TeraTerm with a dedicated terminal, editor, storage device, and serial port - all in one. No Windows. No Linux. No Android. All three OSs have their place - and I use them all - but not in my Forth development platform. I'm not sure what you are describing here, an ADM3A terminal with a cassette tape attached? >> Well, again, I never heard of *anything* you can do in Forth to destroy >> a chip, but I'm glad you're finding it fun! > > Exceeding the device dissipation will toast it pretty quickly. This could happen by accidentally enabling IO pins and causing them to drive against an indomitable force. I have also bricked a 1114 in another way - when flashing went wrong and as a result the internal ROM loader would no longer work. If FlashMagic can no longer find your chip, what else is there to try? If your flash program trashed the boot program it *wasn't* in ROM. I thought there were protections on the boot loader, but I guess not. I'd take that one up with the manufacturer. People depend on that in products. Bricking a product in the field is not good public relations. :) -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | test <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-28 04:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.xgka1w0w28k84i@localhost> |
| In reply to | #30866 |
On Wed, 28 May 2014 02:04:55 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > You are talking DOS which is about the equivalent of the sort of > rudimentary OS [...] Is DOS really a rudimentary OS when it can run Win32, OpenGL, and SDL apps, like Quake 3 Arena, Quake 2, Heretic, QEMU, Java, and Dosbox? Yes, it can, with Japheth's HXRT DOS extender. (IMO, rhetorical) HX Win32 Apps Compatability list http://www.japheth.de/HX/COMPAT.html HX DOS extender http://www.japheth.de/HX.html Japeth's main page (various programming tools) http://www.japheth.de Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-28 10:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5385b7ad$0$4850$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #30866 |
In article <lm3ua3$q7m$1@dont-email.me>, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >On 5/27/2014 10:53 PM, David J wrote: <SNIP> >> >> Exceeding the device dissipation will toast it pretty quickly. This >could happen by accidentally enabling IO pins and causing them to drive >against an indomitable force. I have also bricked a 1114 in another way >- when flashing went wrong and as a result the internal ROM loader would >no longer work. If FlashMagic can no longer find your chip, what else >is there to try? > >If your flash program trashed the boot program it *wasn't* in ROM. I >thought there were protections on the boot loader, but I guess not. I'd >take that one up with the manufacturer. People depend on that in >products. Bricking a product in the field is not good public relations. I've studied one of those lines in depth: the Renesas. You can indeed trash a chip, if you use a programmer that implements a facility to set a password on reading the code. The usual programming environments have some cloud curtains around this. I wrote a programmer in Forth, and it always used 0 as a password. Never had a problem. Still the Renesas had special hardware programming devices to recover the chip without revealing code. Now how someone could blame that on Forth is beyond me. And burning out the output ports ... If you go beyond specs in electronics the conmponents die. One should know that. >-- > >Rick 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 | "M. Simon" <msimon6808@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-28 06:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2c7151f5-4203-4dc0-81a0-1c35ac952280@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #30866 |
On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 6:04:55 AM UTC, rickman wrote: > If your flash program trashed the boot program it *wasn't* in ROM. I > > thought there were protections on the boot loader, but I guess not. I'd > > take that one up with the manufacturer. People depend on that in > > products. Bricking a product in the field is not good public relations. > > :) > > Rick What does the trashing is the memory copy protection bits. You can set them so writing to the chip is impossible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web