Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #35035 > unrolled thread
| Started by | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-12-19 15:59 -0800 |
| Last post | 2014-12-23 15:16 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 340 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-12-19 15:59 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-20 08:36 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-20 03:40 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-20 13:57 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-21 04:38 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-21 21:38 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-21 16:32 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-22 03:56 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mhx@iae.nl - 2014-12-22 00:53 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-12-22 13:43 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 02:57 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 03:38 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 02:42 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-12-22 11:42 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-12-22 07:51 -0500
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-12-22 15:59 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-12-23 11:17 -0500
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 02:57 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 06:09 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-12-23 12:44 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 13:12 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 07:57 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-23 10:31 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 12:27 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-23 15:04 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 19:28 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-25 02:43 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-12-25 20:36 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-25 11:43 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-12-25 20:40 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-26 13:37 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-12-26 11:40 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-05 19:33 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-05 21:31 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-05 21:33 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-06 10:24 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-06 10:13 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-07 00:41 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-06 14:59 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-06 11:53 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-06 10:16 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 18:56 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 12:31 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-25 18:44 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-12-25 12:46 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-26 14:08 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-12-27 09:48 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-27 12:05 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-12-29 13:08 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 20:13 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 20:21 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 12:39 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-23 15:16 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 17:40 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-24 05:34 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 21:12 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-24 12:40 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 09:40 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-25 08:52 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-25 09:18 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-25 11:14 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-24 12:53 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 09:15 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-25 12:07 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-25 11:00 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-24 03:26 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-12-25 19:45 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-24 05:31 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-24 03:28 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-24 11:36 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 22:08 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 14:27 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-23 22:58 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 15:38 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-25 02:37 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 19:16 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-25 06:30 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 22:49 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-25 07:15 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 23:32 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-25 10:39 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-25 10:56 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-26 01:21 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mix <mix@test.net> - 2014-12-25 09:06 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-25 09:39 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-25 21:15 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-25 23:34 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-25 17:09 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-26 02:22 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-25 17:49 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-26 05:22 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-26 14:00 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-26 16:13 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-27 09:50 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-27 04:41 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-27 10:21 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-30 11:50 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-31 15:02 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-12-26 03:28 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-26 10:35 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-26 14:54 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2014-12-26 16:36 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-26 21:19 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-27 10:17 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-27 12:09 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-01 21:07 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-02 11:42 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-01-02 12:45 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-02 23:42 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-04 14:05 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-06 03:51 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-05 20:02 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-05 19:25 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-07 14:52 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-09 08:04 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-08 21:14 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-09 16:25 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-09 09:10 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-10 14:35 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-10 20:51 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-01-11 11:29 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-11 03:46 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-01-11 15:58 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-11 23:01 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-11 16:19 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-11 16:50 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-12 08:53 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-12 08:28 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-12 11:10 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-01-11 11:30 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-11 16:56 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-11 19:47 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-12 08:03 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-01-11 23:44 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-12 09:05 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-12 10:56 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-31 10:37 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-01-09 23:01 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-10 14:43 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-01-11 23:45 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-12 09:09 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-09 10:52 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-10 15:31 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-05 23:34 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-05 22:22 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-06 08:41 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-06 10:30 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-06 13:37 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-06 13:02 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-06 15:31 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-07 01:15 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-06 15:23 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-06 19:25 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-06 17:52 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-06 21:15 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-06 19:30 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2015-01-07 05:07 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-07 15:08 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2015-01-07 12:41 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-07 11:09 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-07 08:02 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-07 11:52 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2015-01-09 14:14 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-09 20:04 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-10 20:57 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2015-01-11 08:31 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-11 19:59 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2015-01-11 22:51 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-15 22:34 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2015-01-16 08:56 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-01-07 01:54 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-01-07 12:33 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-07 14:25 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-07 16:37 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-07 15:02 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-07 06:00 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-07 08:49 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-07 10:06 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-07 18:09 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-07 10:16 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2015-01-10 16:48 +0300
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-08 16:25 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-08 08:50 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mhx@iae.nl - 2015-01-07 10:37 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-08 16:32 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-01-09 18:28 -0500
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-01-07 07:31 -0500
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-07 16:24 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-08 14:02 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-08 09:26 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-08 17:44 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-08 11:01 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-07 17:18 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-07 09:44 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-08 09:31 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-11 03:37 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-07 15:21 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-07 18:19 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-08 09:40 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-08 14:49 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-08 17:02 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2015-01-06 04:42 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-06 08:13 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-09 02:52 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-08 18:34 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-08 20:29 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-08 21:30 -1000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-09 11:14 -0800
Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-09 22:18 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-10 03:15 +0100
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-09 20:56 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-12 03:02 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-12 10:14 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-10 11:39 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-13 18:08 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-13 20:04 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-14 02:43 +0100
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-14 13:34 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-15 02:03 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-15 12:03 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-15 06:47 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-10 19:15 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-10 12:52 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-10 19:05 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-11 09:28 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-11 14:45 -1000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-12 18:28 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-12 17:12 -1000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-12 20:55 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-01-13 03:48 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-13 06:05 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-13 06:34 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-13 06:51 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-01-13 08:03 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-13 19:18 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-01-13 08:26 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-13 09:54 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-13 17:35 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-13 18:19 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-14 21:03 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-14 21:07 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-15 01:06 +0000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-01-15 00:52 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-15 01:17 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-15 17:35 -1000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 20:38 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-16 10:47 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-16 20:47 +0100
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2015-01-16 14:37 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2015-01-16 17:26 -0800
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-17 03:03 +0100
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-01-13 10:40 -1000
Re: Standards (was FORTH on the ...) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-13 19:04 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-11 23:24 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-09 18:09 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-09 09:31 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-09 11:16 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-09 22:38 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-16 13:44 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-17 02:39 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-17 13:37 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-17 18:44 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-18 12:57 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-18 22:48 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-19 03:10 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-18 18:41 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-17 11:45 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-17 17:57 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-18 14:57 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2015-01-19 00:49 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-19 15:04 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! beeflo <beeflobill@gmail.com> - 2015-01-19 16:24 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-01-20 03:26 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-01-20 04:23 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-23 21:42 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-20 20:05 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-20 07:10 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-20 12:04 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-20 16:11 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-20 20:40 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-01-20 23:29 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-20 20:00 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-21 01:55 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-22 00:05 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-01-19 07:42 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-06 09:50 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2015-01-06 04:38 -0600
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-09 21:34 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-09 23:28 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "hughaguilar96@yahoo.com" <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> - 2015-01-10 11:10 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-11 00:49 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-12 22:42 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-12 17:33 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-12 19:17 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-12 21:06 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-01-13 04:08 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-13 15:00 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-13 18:45 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-13 21:12 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-16 20:41 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-21 20:42 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-01-21 23:19 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-01-26 20:20 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2015-01-05 10:31 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2014-12-27 07:16 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-27 13:08 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-27 10:54 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2014-12-27 11:01 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-27 21:25 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2014-12-29 05:20 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-01-04 11:53 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! mhx@iae.nl - 2015-01-04 05:02 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2015-01-04 08:00 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-12-26 15:00 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-26 13:35 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-25 10:55 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-25 07:08 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 23:27 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-25 10:34 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-25 09:47 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-25 19:44 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-25 11:00 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-25 12:01 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-25 16:03 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Tom O'Donnell <tod@nospam.com> - 2014-12-25 17:20 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2014-12-26 21:53 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-08 22:30 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-12-25 20:00 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-25 08:36 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-12-25 19:36 +0100
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-05 19:09 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-23 15:35 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-01-05 19:16 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-01-08 15:51 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-21 16:02 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-12-22 10:51 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-12-22 05:47 -0800
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-12-22 09:10 -0500
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-12-22 15:23 +0000
Re: FORTH on the Advanced Placement Computer Science ! anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-12-23 15:16 +0000
Page 7 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 17 Next page →
| From | Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 11:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <54b2507a$0$21111$703f8584@textnews.kpn.nl> |
| In reply to | #35701 |
On 11/01/15 07:51, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 1/10/15 1:35 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> >>> On 1/9/15 3:25 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The ANS-Forth standard doesn't support the use of C" and S" in >>>>>>> interpretive mode, and SwiftForth and Gforth both fail at this. I >>>>>>> fixed the problem in my novice package --- this is really >>>>>>> necessary to >>>>>>> interactively debug functions that take strings as arguments. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps you have meant C" only, as S" in interpretive mode seems >>>>>> to be >>>>>> Gforth as well as ANS-Forth in FILE word set (see 11.6.1.2165). >>>>> >>>>> C" is actually not used very much nowadays, AFAIK. It was retained in >>>>> Forth94 because at the time some people used it, but I think counted >>>>> strings are used much less nowadays. >>>> >>>> I think they still can be useful for storing short strings in structure >>>> fields with a fixed width. >>>> >>>> Something like in this: >>>> 0 >>>> 22 CHARS +FIELD person.name >>>> ... >>>> CONSTANT Person >>>> >>>> , – where the person.name field is supposed to store a counted >>>> string of >>>> no more than 21 characters length. >>> >>> Oh, counted strings are wonderful! IMO they are the preferred way to >>> store strings internally, for many reasons. The vast majority of >>> internal strings work with an 8-bit count. But for some years we have >>> been gravitating toward using addr-cnt pairs for passing references to >>> strings on the stack. In our implementation, S" stores its string as a >>> counted string, likewise names and other strings, but we pass addr-cnt >>> on the stack. That is why C" (which passes the address of a counted >>> string) is not often used and there was no pressure to make an >>> interpretive version. >>> >> >> This is interesting. But that means that either your implementation the >> S" strings limited to 256 characters or you should use some tricks in >> the counted strings to store more characters there. > > I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than > 256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings, > particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications I've > been involved with have developed application-specific data structures > for the long strings. One application comes to mind: SwiftForth Linux PATH_MAX = 4096 OSX PATH_MAX = 1024 Can be kind of crucial for a decent working SF to facilitate this.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 03:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <85533a26-5eab-497f-b39e-153777ec4fda@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35706 |
On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 4:47:05 AM UTC-6, Roelf Toxopeus wrote: > One application comes to mind: SwiftForth > Linux PATH_MAX = 4096 > OSX PATH_MAX = 1024 > Can be kind of crucial for a decent working SF to facilitate this. The subject is S", not strings. The limitation just means that you'd need a different parsing word if you wanted to have a 4k string literal for a path. ... with that said, it looks like SF's OPEN-FILE uses R-BUF (a MAX_PATH=256 pad allocated on the return stack), so you'd need to bump MAX_PATH in src/linux/kernel/config.f and recompile, or use use your own reimplementation of OPEN-FILE as well. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 15:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <54b28fa5$0$21179$703f8584@textnews.kpn.nl> |
| In reply to | #35708 |
On 11/01/15 12:46, Julian Fondren wrote: > On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 4:47:05 AM UTC-6, Roelf Toxopeus wrote: >> One application comes to mind: SwiftForth >> Linux PATH_MAX = 4096 >> OSX PATH_MAX = 1024 >> Can be kind of crucial for a decent working SF to facilitate this. > > The subject is S", not strings. I refer to what Elizabeth and Alexander are discussing. "In our implementation, S" stores its string as a counted string" "Very few applications actually require such long strings" i.e. longer than 256 chars. SwiftForth is such an application. It's an example for what she's saying. "The few string-intensive applications I've been involved with have developed application-specific data structures for the long strings" Current SwiftForth uses 256 chars buffers to deal with paths. They use typical counted string words like PLACE and APPEND when dealing with the paths. This points to S" and counted strings for sure! Apparently, in this particular case, they forgot to develop the needed application-specific tools to deal with the OS requirements. It's a very polite 'heads up' and illustration for what they're talking about: S", how it's implemented and where it shouldn't be used.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 23:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m8uvcn$19f$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #35715 |
Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
> Current SwiftForth uses 256 chars buffers to deal with
> paths. They use typical counted string words like PLACE
> and APPEND when dealing with the paths. This points to
> S" and counted strings for sure!
>
> Apparently, in this particular case, they forgot to
> develop the needed application-specific tools to deal
> with the OS requirements. It's a very polite 'heads up'
> and illustration for what they're talking about: S",
> how it's implemented and where it shouldn't be used.
Incredibly bad.
This sounds like software from the 1970's or 1980's for
an 8-bit or 16-bit microcomputer.
And people pay for this crap???
Gauche Scheme (it's a lot cheaper than SwiftForth!):
(use gauche.sequence)
(string-join
(permute
(string-split "
> Current SwiftForth uses 256 chars buffers to deal with
> paths. They use typical counted string words like PLACE
> and APPEND when dealing with the paths. This points to
> S\" and counted strings for sure!
>
> Apparently, in this particular case, they forgot to
> develop the needed application-specific tools to deal
> with the OS requirements. It's a very polite 'heads up'
> and illustration for what they're talking about: S\",
> how it's implemented and where it shouldn't be used."
#/\s+/)
'(3 84 85 86)))
===>
"SwiftForth shouldn't be used."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 16:19 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8348e6df-653d-417f-b3e5-f00aae2e8d9d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35725 |
On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 7:56:54 AM UTC-6, Alexander Skobelev wrote:
> "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod
> tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim
> veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea
> commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
> velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint
> occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt
> mollit anim id est laborum."
>
> What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth?
Suppose it had a lot double quotes in it. Then you couldn't use S"
anyway, and if you used S\" or the like, it would work but it would
be pointlessly ugly. Just define a parsing word that does precisely
what you want.
: | ( n "text" -- n' )
dup if bl c, 1+ then 0 parse tuck here swap dup allot move +;
here 0
| blah blah blah
| blah blah blah
| blah blah blah
type \ output: blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ok
On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 5:02:14 PM UTC-6, WJ wrote:
>
> Incredibly bad.
>
> This sounds like software from the 1970's or 1980's for
> an 8-bit or 16-bit microcomputer.
>
> And people pay for this crap???
>
It must be your search for perfection that has you flitting anxiously
between trivial exercises in different languages, and challenging
communities with them. Don't want to put too much effort into
anything, lest it be wasted. Hoping, waiting for a passing sage to
end your search with "you fool, the perfect language is Mercury! Go!
It waits for you!" But even if that happened, you'd find that
Mercury isn't really fleshed out for a lot of practical tasks, for
example, and that you'll need to spend some time with the FFI and
other languages.
There's no perfect language. There's no perfect anything. There's
just your choice of what kinds of faults are more acceptable to you.
The Forth programmer says, give me a 90% solution that I have total
control and understanding over, and I'll make it do what I need it to
do. A thing about 90% solutions is, they often *really are* 90%
solutions; meanwhile, the advertised-as-100% solutions are all
secretly horribly flawed. One day you realize you can't get there
from here; one day "oh the customer said he wants a single extra bale
of hay" means that you have to ditch the camel and learn how
combustion engines work; one day you look back over the wreckage of a
project and realize you'd spent 90% of your time on the 30% of flaw
that you weren't even expecting.
[Parting shot elided.]
-- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 16:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <13b58482-4c86-447b-adef-3fb11ef8ef7f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35728 |
On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 5:19:53 PM UTC-7, Julian Fondren wrote: > Suppose it had a lot double quotes in it. Then you couldn't use S" > anyway, and if you used S\" or the like, it would work but it would > be pointlessly ugly. I have STRING in the novice package that takes an arbitrary delimiter. > Just define a parsing word that does precisely > what you want. > > : | ( n "text" -- n' ) > dup if bl c, 1+ then 0 parse tuck here swap dup allot move +; > > here 0 > | blah blah blah > | blah blah blah > | blah blah blah > type \ output: blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ok I don't like having to manually put a | in front of every line. Also, it is inconvenient to have the result stored in the dictionary --- you can move it to the heap and then remove it from the dictionary (if you have a MARKER in front), but that is a lot of work compared to just putting it in the heap to start with. I'll write something for the novice package next release. > On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 5:02:14 PM UTC-6, WJ wrote: > > > > Incredibly bad. > > > > This sounds like software from the 1970's or 1980's for > > an 8-bit or 16-bit microcomputer. > > > > And people pay for this crap??? > > > > It must be your search for perfection that has you flitting anxiously > between trivial exercises in different languages, and challenging > communities with them. Don't want to put too much effort into > anything, lest it be wasted. Hoping, waiting for a passing sage to > end your search with "you fool, the perfect language is Mercury! Go! > It waits for you!" But even if that happened, you'd find that > Mercury isn't really fleshed out for a lot of practical tasks, for > example, and that you'll need to spend some time with the FFI and > other languages. > > There's no perfect language. There's no perfect anything. There's > just your choice of what kinds of faults are more acceptable to you. > The Forth programmer says, give me a 90% solution that I have total > control and understanding over, and I'll make it do what I need it to > do. A thing about 90% solutions is, they often *really are* 90% > solutions; meanwhile, the advertised-as-100% solutions are all > secretly horribly flawed. One day you realize you can't get there > from here; one day "oh the customer said he wants a single extra bale > of hay" means that you have to ditch the camel and learn how > combustion engines work; one day you look back over the wreckage of a > project and realize you'd spent 90% of your time on the 30% of flaw > that you weren't even expecting. > > [Parting shot elided.] > > -- Julian Save your philosophizing for the camel --- it is wasted on WJ.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-12 08:53 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <m2twzwo87t.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #35728 |
Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> writes: > On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 7:56:54 AM UTC-6, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >> "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod >> tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim >> veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea >> commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate >> velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint >> occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt >> mollit anim id est laborum." >> >> What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth? > > Suppose it had a lot double quotes in it. Then you couldn't use S" > anyway, and if you used S\" or the like, it would work but it would > be pointlessly ugly. Just define a parsing word that does precisely > what you want. > > : | ( n "text" -- n' ) > dup if bl c, 1+ then 0 parse tuck here swap dup allot move +; > > here 0 > | blah blah blah > | blah blah blah > | blah blah blah > type \ output: blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ok > > […] So, the right way is to not use the standard words but write your own parser for that. :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-12 08:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m900je$nq6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #35728 |
On 12/01/2015 00:19, Julian Fondren wrote:
> On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 7:56:54 AM UTC-6, Alexander Skobelev wrote:
>> "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod
>> tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim
>> veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea
>> commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
>> velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint
>> occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt
>> mollit anim id est laborum."
>>
>> What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth?
>
> Suppose it had a lot double quotes in it. Then you couldn't use S"
> anyway, and if you used S\" or the like, it would work but it would
> be pointlessly ugly. Just define a parsing word that does precisely
> what you want.
>
> : | ( n "text" -- n' )
> dup if bl c, 1+ then 0 parse tuck here swap dup allot move +;
>
> here 0
> | blah blah blah
> | blah blah blah
> | blah blah blah
> type \ output: blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah ok
>
>
Alternatively
: line, ( u1 caddr2 u2 -- u' )
tuck here swap dup chars allot move +
;
: <text> ( "text" -- caddr u )
here 0
begin
refill
while
bl word count s" </text>" compare
while
0 >in ! source line, bl c, 1+
repeat then
;
\ <text> must be at the end of a line
\ </text> must be at the begining of a line
\ the text must not contain "</text>" at the start of a line
<text>
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod
tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim
veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea
commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint
occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt
mollit anim id est laborum.
</text>
--
Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-12 11:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m90a3702ce5@enews4.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #35725 |
WJ wrote: > Roelf Toxopeus wrote: > > > Current SwiftForth uses 256 chars buffers to deal with > > paths. They use typical counted string words like PLACE > > and APPEND when dealing with the paths. This points to > > S" and counted strings for sure! > > > > Apparently, in this particular case, they forgot to > > develop the needed application-specific tools to deal > > with the OS requirements. It's a very polite 'heads up' > > and illustration for what they're talking about: S", > > how it's implemented and where it shouldn't be used. > > Incredibly bad. > > This sounds like software from the 1970's or 1980's for > an 8-bit or 16-bit microcomputer. > > And people pay for this crap??? > > Gauche Scheme (it's a lot cheaper than SwiftForth!): > > (use gauche.sequence) > > (string-join > (permute > (string-split " > > Current SwiftForth uses 256 chars buffers to deal with > > paths. They use typical counted string words like PLACE > > and APPEND when dealing with the paths. This points to > > S\" and counted strings for sure! > > > > Apparently, in this particular case, they forgot to > > develop the needed application-specific tools to deal > > with the OS requirements. It's a very polite 'heads up' > > and illustration for what they're talking about: S\", > > how it's implemented and where it shouldn't be used." > #/\s+/) > '(3 84 85 86))) > > ===> > "SwiftForth shouldn't be used." Of course, counted strings are the way to go if the size of the count is large enough. I think that Free Pascal uses 32 bits.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 11:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <54b25deb.426804944@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #35701 |
On Sat, 10 Jan 2015 20:51:34 -1000, "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> wrote: >I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than >256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings, >particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications I've >been involved with have developed application-specific data structures >for the long strings. I would mostly agree, but in all applications I see that use strings heavily, strings are structures/objects referred to by single cell pointers. In turn, there are string libraries which are much more heavy-weight than the facilities provided by an ANS or Forth-2012 kernel. 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 | Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 16:56 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <m27fwte7z0.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #35701 |
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: > On 1/10/15 1:35 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> >>> On 1/9/15 3:25 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The ANS-Forth standard doesn't support the use of C" and S" in >>>>>>> interpretive mode, and SwiftForth and Gforth both fail at this. I >>>>>>> fixed the problem in my novice package --- this is really necessary to >>>>>>> interactively debug functions that take strings as arguments. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps you have meant C" only, as S" in interpretive mode seems to be >>>>>> Gforth as well as ANS-Forth in FILE word set (see 11.6.1.2165). >>>>> >>>>> C" is actually not used very much nowadays, AFAIK. It was retained in >>>>> Forth94 because at the time some people used it, but I think counted >>>>> strings are used much less nowadays. >>>> >>>> I think they still can be useful for storing short strings in structure >>>> fields with a fixed width. >>>> >>>> Something like in this: >>>> 0 >>>> 22 CHARS +FIELD person.name >>>> ... >>>> CONSTANT Person >>>> >>>> , – where the person.name field is supposed to store a counted string of >>>> no more than 21 characters length. >>> >>> Oh, counted strings are wonderful! IMO they are the preferred way to >>> store strings internally, for many reasons. The vast majority of >>> internal strings work with an 8-bit count. But for some years we have >>> been gravitating toward using addr-cnt pairs for passing references to >>> strings on the stack. In our implementation, S" stores its string as a >>> counted string, likewise names and other strings, but we pass addr-cnt >>> on the stack. That is why C" (which passes the address of a counted >>> string) is not often used and there was no pressure to make an >>> interpretive version. >>> >> >> This is interesting. But that means that either your implementation the >> S" strings limited to 256 characters or you should use some tricks in >> the counted strings to store more characters there. > > I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than > 256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings, > particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications > I've been involved with have developed application-specific data > structures for the long strings. Perhaps it's so. But how somebody has told about multiple inheritance: it is rarely needed, but sometimes it is really needed. I think this is the same case here. "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum." What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 19:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m8ujvs01is6@enews4.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #35713 |
Alexander Skobelev wrote:
> > I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than
> > 256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings,
> > particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications
> > I've been involved with have developed application-specific data
> > structures for the long strings.
>
> Perhaps it's so. But how somebody has told about multiple inheritance: it
> is rarely needed, but sometimes it is really needed. I think this is the
> same case here.
>
> "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod
> tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim
> veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea
> commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
> velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint
> occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt
> mollit anim id est laborum."
>
> What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth?
Gauche Scheme:
(define prose
"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod
tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim
veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea
commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint
occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt
mollit anim id est laborum.")
(print "Length of string: " (string-length prose))
(print "Number of lines: " (length (string-split prose "\n")))
(print "Number of words: " (length (string-split prose #/\s+/)))
(for-each print
(sort
(delete-duplicates
(remove (lambda (s) (equal? s "")) (string-split prose #/\W+/)))
(lambda (a b)
(let ((len1 (string-length a)) (len2 (string-length b)))
(= -1
(if (= len1 len2)
(compare a b)
(compare len1 len2)))))))
Length of string: 451
Number of lines: 7
Number of words: 69
Ut
ad
do
ea
et
eu
ex
id
in
ut
est
non
qui
sed
sit
Duis
amet
anim
aute
elit
enim
esse
nisi
quis
sint
sunt
Lorem
culpa
dolor
ipsum
irure
magna
minim
nulla
velit
aliqua
cillum
dolore
fugiat
labore
mollit
tempor
veniam
aliquip
commodo
eiusmod
laboris
laborum
nostrud
officia
ullamco
deserunt
occaecat
pariatur
proident
Excepteur
consequat
cupidatat
voluptate
adipiscing
incididunt
consectetur
exercitation
reprehenderit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-12 08:03 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <m2y4p8oaje.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #35720 |
"WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> writes: > Alexander Skobelev wrote: > >> > I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than >> > 256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings, >> > particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications >> > I've been involved with have developed application-specific data >> > structures for the long strings. >> >> Perhaps it's so. But how somebody has told about multiple inheritance: it >> is rarely needed, but sometimes it is really needed. I think this is the >> same case here. >> >> "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod >> tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim >> veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea >> commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate >> velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint >> occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt >> mollit anim id est laborum." >> >> What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth? > > Gauche Scheme: > [ … ] Dear WJ, thank you for pointing to Gauche Scheme which, I suppose, is definitely a great script interpreter. I give you promise that one day I'll look at it, even though I prefer Common Lisp to Scheme and the not garbage collected languages to the garbage collected ones. Right now, I would like to discuss Forth, that definitly has its shortcomings, but also it has something that attracts me irresistibly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 23:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <u8oe696ru0fu$.1sfh9lwhibglj$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #35713 |
Op Sun, 11 Jan 2015 16:56:51 +0300 schreef Alexander Skobelev: > "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: > >> On 1/10/15 1:35 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 1/9/15 3:25 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com writes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The ANS-Forth standard doesn't support the use of C" and S" in >>>>>>>> interpretive mode, and SwiftForth and Gforth both fail at this. I >>>>>>>> fixed the problem in my novice package --- this is really necessary to >>>>>>>> interactively debug functions that take strings as arguments. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps you have meant C" only, as S" in interpretive mode seems to be >>>>>>> Gforth as well as ANS-Forth in FILE word set (see 11.6.1.2165). >>>>>> >>>>>> C" is actually not used very much nowadays, AFAIK. It was retained in >>>>>> Forth94 because at the time some people used it, but I think counted >>>>>> strings are used much less nowadays. >>>>> >>>>> I think they still can be useful for storing short strings in structure >>>>> fields with a fixed width. >>>>> >>>>> Something like in this: >>>>> 0 >>>>> 22 CHARS +FIELD person.name >>>>> ... >>>>> CONSTANT Person >>>>> >>>>> , – where the person.name field is supposed to store a counted string of >>>>> no more than 21 characters length. >>>> >>>> Oh, counted strings are wonderful! IMO they are the preferred way to >>>> store strings internally, for many reasons. The vast majority of >>>> internal strings work with an 8-bit count. But for some years we have >>>> been gravitating toward using addr-cnt pairs for passing references to >>>> strings on the stack. In our implementation, S" stores its string as a >>>> counted string, likewise names and other strings, but we pass addr-cnt >>>> on the stack. That is why C" (which passes the address of a counted >>>> string) is not often used and there was no pressure to make an >>>> interpretive version. >>>> >>> >>> This is interesting. But that means that either your implementation the >>> S" strings limited to 256 characters or you should use some tricks in >>> the counted strings to store more characters there. >> >> I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than >> 256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings, >> particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications >> I've been involved with have developed application-specific data >> structures for the long strings. > > Perhaps it's so. But how somebody has told about multiple inheritance: it > is rarely needed, but sometimes it is really needed. I think this is the > same case here. > > "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod > tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim > veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea > commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate > velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint > occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt > mollit anim id est laborum." > > What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth? Put the string (including the quotes) in a file and load the file with ciforth: $ wina \ this is cygwin, lina under linux works the same. 80386 ciforth 5.1 "long.frt" INCLUDED OK TYPE Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. OK -- Coos CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-12 09:05 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <m2ppako7nf.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #35724 |
Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> writes: > Op Sun, 11 Jan 2015 16:56:51 +0300 schreef Alexander Skobelev: > >> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> >>> On 1/10/15 1:35 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> On 1/9/15 3:25 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>>>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com writes: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The ANS-Forth standard doesn't support the use of C" and S" in >>>>>>>>> interpretive mode, and SwiftForth and Gforth both fail at this. I >>>>>>>>> fixed the problem in my novice package --- this is really necessary to >>>>>>>>> interactively debug functions that take strings as arguments. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Perhaps you have meant C" only, as S" in interpretive mode seems to be >>>>>>>> Gforth as well as ANS-Forth in FILE word set (see 11.6.1.2165). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> C" is actually not used very much nowadays, AFAIK. It was retained in >>>>>>> Forth94 because at the time some people used it, but I think counted >>>>>>> strings are used much less nowadays. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think they still can be useful for storing short strings in structure >>>>>> fields with a fixed width. >>>>>> >>>>>> Something like in this: >>>>>> 0 >>>>>> 22 CHARS +FIELD person.name >>>>>> ... >>>>>> CONSTANT Person >>>>>> >>>>>> , – where the person.name field is supposed to store a counted string of >>>>>> no more than 21 characters length. >>>>> >>>>> Oh, counted strings are wonderful! IMO they are the preferred way to >>>>> store strings internally, for many reasons. The vast majority of >>>>> internal strings work with an 8-bit count. But for some years we have >>>>> been gravitating toward using addr-cnt pairs for passing references to >>>>> strings on the stack. In our implementation, S" stores its string as a >>>>> counted string, likewise names and other strings, but we pass addr-cnt >>>>> on the stack. That is why C" (which passes the address of a counted >>>>> string) is not often used and there was no pressure to make an >>>>> interpretive version. >>>>> >>>> >>>> This is interesting. But that means that either your implementation the >>>> S" strings limited to 256 characters or you should use some tricks in >>>> the counted strings to store more characters there. >>> >>> I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than >>> 256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings, >>> particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications >>> I've been involved with have developed application-specific data >>> structures for the long strings. >> >> Perhaps it's so. But how somebody has told about multiple inheritance: it >> is rarely needed, but sometimes it is really needed. I think this is the >> same case here. >> >> "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod >> tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim >> veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea >> commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate >> velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint >> occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt >> mollit anim id est laborum." >> >> What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth? > > Put the string (including the quotes) in a file and load the file with > ciforth: > > $ wina \ this is cygwin, lina under linux works the same. > > 80386 ciforth 5.1 > "long.frt" INCLUDED > OK > TYPE > Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod > tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim > veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea > commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate > velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint > occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt > mollit anim id est laborum. OK > It looks like ciforth supports strings like "..." with length more than 256 characters. And you don't need read them from separate file: iMac:~ sasha$ /usr/local/xina/xina 80386 ciforth beta-5.123 "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum." OK . . 445 36872 OK Aha, I see you should put the string into the file if it contains line breaks inside. > -- > Coos > > CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications > http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-12 10:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <54b3a858$0$6970$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #35724 |
In article <u8oe696ru0fu$.1sfh9lwhibglj$.dlg@40tude.net>, Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> wrote: >Op Sun, 11 Jan 2015 16:56:51 +0300 schreef Alexander Skobelev: > >> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> >>> On 1/10/15 1:35 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> On 1/9/15 3:25 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>>>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com writes: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The ANS-Forth standard doesn't support the use of C" and S" in >>>>>>>>> interpretive mode, and SwiftForth and Gforth both fail at this. I >>>>>>>>> fixed the problem in my novice package --- this is really necessary to >>>>>>>>> interactively debug functions that take strings as arguments. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Perhaps you have meant C" only, as S" in interpretive mode seems to be >>>>>>>> Gforth as well as ANS-Forth in FILE word set (see 11.6.1.2165). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> C" is actually not used very much nowadays, AFAIK. It was retained in >>>>>>> Forth94 because at the time some people used it, but I think counted >>>>>>> strings are used much less nowadays. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think they still can be useful for storing short strings in structure >>>>>> fields with a fixed width. >>>>>> >>>>>> Something like in this: >>>>>> 0 >>>>>> 22 CHARS +FIELD person.name >>>>>> ... >>>>>> CONSTANT Person >>>>>> >>>>>> , – where the person.name field is supposed to store a counted string of >>>>>> no more than 21 characters length. >>>>> >>>>> Oh, counted strings are wonderful! IMO they are the preferred way to >>>>> store strings internally, for many reasons. The vast majority of >>>>> internal strings work with an 8-bit count. But for some years we have >>>>> been gravitating toward using addr-cnt pairs for passing references to >>>>> strings on the stack. In our implementation, S" stores its string as a >>>>> counted string, likewise names and other strings, but we pass addr-cnt >>>>> on the stack. That is why C" (which passes the address of a counted >>>>> string) is not often used and there was no pressure to make an >>>>> interpretive version. >>>>> >>>> >>>> This is interesting. But that means that either your implementation the >>>> S" strings limited to 256 characters or you should use some tricks in >>>> the counted strings to store more characters there. >>> >>> I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than >>> 256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings, >>> particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications >>> I've been involved with have developed application-specific data >>> structures for the long strings. >> >> Perhaps it's so. But how somebody has told about multiple inheritance: it >> is rarely needed, but sometimes it is really needed. I think this is the >> same case here. >> >> "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod >> tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim >> veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea >> commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate >> velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint >> occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt >> mollit anim id est laborum." >> >> What is the right way to put this text in a program on Forth? > >Put the string (including the quotes) in a file and load the file with >ciforth: > >$ wina \ this is cygwin, lina under linux works the same. > >80386 ciforth 5.1 >"long.frt" INCLUDED > OK >TYPE >Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod >tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim >veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea >commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate >velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint >occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt >mollit anim id est laborum. OK Or just have only the text in the file and do "long.frt" GET-FILE TYPE In this way the file doesn't go through the interpreter. That is easier because if so, you have to double any quotes. """What?"" she asked. ""are you mad""" TYPE "What?" she asked. "are you mad" OK [The one and only, non-negoticable escape convention in ciforth strings.] This is for character interpretations that are the same as the characters of ciforth's WORDS. If you need chinese text, a file certainly is the way to go, and you need CTYPE probably. Then the file is still a sequence of bytes (aka address units). Don't call those characters, Bernd! > >-- >Coos 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 | 2015-01-31 10:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <54ccb065$0$15929$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #35701 |
In article <wqydnX5nqb7qgC_JnZ2dnUU7-KudnZ2d@supernews.com>,
Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
>On 1/10/15 1:35 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote:
>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 1/9/15 3:25 AM, Alexander Skobelev wrote:
>>>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote:
>>>
<SNIP>
>>
>> This is interesting. But that means that either your implementation the
>> S" strings limited to 256 characters or you should use some tricks in
>> the counted strings to store more characters there.
>
>I don't think S" is the right mechanism to handle strings longer than
>256 bytes. Very few applications actually require such long strings,
>particularly in definitions. The few string-intensive applications I've
>been involved with have developed application-specific data structures
>for the long strings.
I tried to prove you wrong by this recent example of a regular expression
script to autmatically edit the ciarm forth source
---------------------8<--------------------------------
#!/home/albert/bin/refilter -s
\ $Id: blocksfilter,v 1.7 2014/11/14 20:13:06 albert Exp albert $
\ Get rid of nested {} macro's
\
CREATE BUFFIE 1,000,000 ALLOT
BUFFIE FAR-DP !
ARGC 4 < IF
"
Filter to get rid of m4 { } blocks as used in the ciforth system.
Three arguments are needed:
1. input file
2. output file
3. the name of the macro, e.g. _DLL_
4 .. extra arguments are also processed
" ETYPE BYE
THEN
: GLOBAL GLOBAL .S ; \ If you want to debug
1 ARG[] GET-FILE
\ Change all occurence to be cut to the same name.
ARGC 3 ?DO I ARG[] "_AWAY_" GLOBAL LOOP
....
---------------------8<--------------------------------
but actually the multline help string is smaller than 256 char's.
Whether you want to risk it being larger and whether you want to count
all the time, is another matter. Or you could put up with
S" Filter to get rid of m4 { } blocks as used in the ciforth system. " CR
S" Three arguments are needed: " CR
S" 1. input file " CR
S" 2. output file " CR
S" 3. the name of the macro, e.g. _DLL_ " CR
S" 4 .. extra arguments are also processed " CR
BYE
(where the output appears on standard out instead of the error channel.
Bottom line, using long strings is a matter of style, it shouldn't be
restricted by standards.
>
>Cheers,
>Elizabeth
>
--
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 | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-09 23:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <i6nitarnprou.dzl8de4ehlom.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #35649 |
Op Fri, 09 Jan 2015 16:25:57 +0300 schreef Alexander Skobelev:
> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>
>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote:
>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com writes:
>>>
>>>> The ANS-Forth standard doesn't support the use of C" and S" in
>>>> interpretive mode, and SwiftForth and Gforth both fail at this. I
>>>> fixed the problem in my novice package --- this is really necessary to
>>>> interactively debug functions that take strings as arguments.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps you have meant C" only, as S" in interpretive mode seems to be
>>> Gforth as well as ANS-Forth in FILE word set (see 11.6.1.2165).
>>
>> C" is actually not used very much nowadays, AFAIK. It was retained in
>> Forth94 because at the time some people used it, but I think counted
>> strings are used much less nowadays.
>
> I think they still can be useful for storing short strings in structure
> fields with a fixed width.
>
> Something like in this:
> 0
> 22 CHARS +FIELD person.name
> ...
> CONSTANT Person
>
> , – where the person.name field is supposed to store a counted string of
> no more than 21 characters length.
You can also store uncounted strings (left aligned) in the field
: PUT ( c-addr u addr -- )
dup len blank \ Erase storage
swap len min cmove ; \ Store string
: GET ( addr -- c-addr u )
len -trailing ;
Where addr is the address of the field and len is the size of the field, in
this case 22.
--
Coos
CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications
http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-10 14:43 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <m2ppamj1yw.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #35676 |
Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> writes: > Op Fri, 09 Jan 2015 16:25:57 +0300 schreef Alexander Skobelev: > >> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >> >>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com writes: >>>> >>>>> The ANS-Forth standard doesn't support the use of C" and S" in >>>>> interpretive mode, and SwiftForth and Gforth both fail at this. I >>>>> fixed the problem in my novice package --- this is really necessary to >>>>> interactively debug functions that take strings as arguments. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Perhaps you have meant C" only, as S" in interpretive mode seems to be >>>> Gforth as well as ANS-Forth in FILE word set (see 11.6.1.2165). >>> >>> C" is actually not used very much nowadays, AFAIK. It was retained in >>> Forth94 because at the time some people used it, but I think counted >>> strings are used much less nowadays. >> >> I think they still can be useful for storing short strings in structure >> fields with a fixed width. >> >> Something like in this: >> 0 >> 22 CHARS +FIELD person.name >> ... >> CONSTANT Person >> >> , – where the person.name field is supposed to store a counted string of >> no more than 21 characters length. > > You can also store uncounted strings (left aligned) in the field > : PUT ( c-addr u addr -- ) > dup len blank \ Erase storage > swap len min cmove ; \ Store string > : GET ( addr -- c-addr u ) > len -trailing ; > Where addr is the address of the field and len is the size of the field, in > this case 22. > Yes, this is a possible solution. But I still prefer the counted strings more here as they don't require -trailing in the getter.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-11 23:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1e8rr8252gv4h$.1pe3q7wc2oxj5$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #35695 |
Op Sat, 10 Jan 2015 14:43:03 +0300 schreef Alexander Skobelev: > Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> writes: > >> Op Fri, 09 Jan 2015 16:25:57 +0300 schreef Alexander Skobelev: >> >>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 1/8/15 7:04 PM, Alexander Skobelev wrote: >>>>> hughaguilar96@gmail.com writes: >>>>> >>>>>> The ANS-Forth standard doesn't support the use of C" and S" in >>>>>> interpretive mode, and SwiftForth and Gforth both fail at this. I >>>>>> fixed the problem in my novice package --- this is really necessary to >>>>>> interactively debug functions that take strings as arguments. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps you have meant C" only, as S" in interpretive mode seems to be >>>>> Gforth as well as ANS-Forth in FILE word set (see 11.6.1.2165). >>>> >>>> C" is actually not used very much nowadays, AFAIK. It was retained in >>>> Forth94 because at the time some people used it, but I think counted >>>> strings are used much less nowadays. >>> >>> I think they still can be useful for storing short strings in structure >>> fields with a fixed width. >>> >>> Something like in this: >>> 0 >>> 22 CHARS +FIELD person.name >>> ... >>> CONSTANT Person >>> >>> , – where the person.name field is supposed to store a counted string of >>> no more than 21 characters length. >> >> You can also store uncounted strings (left aligned) in the field >>: PUT ( c-addr u addr -- ) >> dup len blank \ Erase storage >> swap len min cmove ; \ Store string >>: GET ( addr -- c-addr u ) >> len -trailing ; >> Where addr is the address of the field and len is the size of the field, in >> this case 22. >> > > Yes, this is a possible solution. But I still prefer the counted strings > more here as they don't require -trailing in the getter. So, leave it away ;-) -- Coos CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web