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 3 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 17 Next page →
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-06 10:16 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <38WdnYi5jI063zHJnZ2dnUU7-RsAAAAA@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #35503 |
On 1/6/15 1:53 AM, Alex McDonald wrote:
> on 06/01/2015 07:33:44, "Elizabeth D. Rather" wrote:
>
>>
>> Whereas comments for ASM have to explain what the code is doing, the
>> principal purpose of our comments is to provide usage info (inputs,
>> outputs, description of the process as a logical level).
>>
>
> My all time favourite is
>
> LA R6,1 Load R6 with 1
>
> Which is accurate, but fails to explain why register 6 needs to be set to
> the value 1. Answering the question why is what makes good vs poor or
> simply pointless commentary. The same is true of comments at the
> functional level. Knowing what a word or function does may be inadequate;
> knowing why it is needed is of more value.
Yes, that is certainly useless. What you need to say in this case is
something more like:
LA R6,1 Load R6 with the initial count.
In other words, what is the purpose of the instruction. But in the bad
old days I did see a lot of useless comments.
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 | mix <mix@test.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-23 18:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7cdt8$897$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #35139 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > mix <mix@test.net> writes: >> The reason for that is lack of good teachers. Assembler is no any more >> complicated than any other programming language, but many things are done >> differently in assembly code. > > Assembly is harder to debug mostly because of its complete lack of > memory safety, so it's easy for a buggy program to clobber data > belonging to some other part of the program, that doesn't cause > observable misbehaviour until the other part of the program runs and you > have to diagnose what happened to it. > > If a program in a safe language has a similar bug, then it crashes with > an understandable diagnostic as soon as the buggy code tries writing to > the wrong place; or better yet, the error is found at compile time, say > through type checking. Better yet, the programmer is not doing that mistake, because there is only one type: pointer to array of bytes, that's it. > There is also the far higher amount of code you have to write to do even > the simplest things, compared to an HLL. -- mix x
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-23 12:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7xegrqw1jb.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #35147 |
mix <mix@test.net> writes: > Better yet, the programmer is not doing that mistake, because there is only > one type: pointer to array of bytes, that's it. To use an analogy that came up in Haskell, think of a jigsaw puzzle (picture of scenery, say) whose pieces have complicated shapes (types). So if you try putting a piece in the wrong place, it doesn't fit. Now imagine the same puzzle except the pieces are all 1x1 squares. Yes the square pieces are "simpler", but the puzzle becomes much harder to solve.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-25 18:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7hlts$a4u$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #35151 |
Paul Rubin wrote: > mix <mix@test.net> writes: > > Better yet, the programmer is not doing that mistake, because there is only > > one type: pointer to array of bytes, that's it. > > To use an analogy that came up in Haskell, think of a jigsaw puzzle > (picture of scenery, say) whose pieces have complicated shapes (types). > So if you try putting a piece in the wrong place, it doesn't fit. Now > imagine the same puzzle except the pieces are all 1x1 squares. Yes the > square pieces are "simpler", but the puzzle becomes much harder to > solve. Very nice analogy, but disciples of ANS Forth won't understand it. I'm afraid that they are too simple-minded to grok high-level languages. They are the worst enemies that Forth has ever had. If Forth is to live, then ANS Forth must die.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-25 12:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0e3c64fc-da22-4e09-b033-297426c7faa8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35240 |
On Thursday, December 25, 2014 12:44:37 PM UTC-6, WJ wrote: > Very nice analogy, but disciples of ANS Forth won't understand it. > I'm afraid that they are too simple-minded to grok high-level > languages. > > They are the worst enemies that Forth has ever had. > > If Forth is to live, then ANS Forth must die. Here we have the most readily and naturally extended language on the planet, and the criticism against it is ever "This language [without extension] is less expressive or less capable of this task than that that language (with some libriaries) is." I wonder in how many languages and for how many tasks you can make that point. If you were more productive I guess you would already have the next Factor or RetroForth or blah. Meanwhile... just so you have some idea at all of the kinds of things that actually *do* go through the heads of the 'disciples of ANS Forth': Have you heard of PHP? It sucks. One of the biggest things it sucks is CPU time and memory. It is the absolute suckiest on shared hosting, because the hacks to make it suck less aren't safe to use when you don't trust your users and your users also don't trust each other. That it sucks is actually a big problem for a lot of its users. Nonetheless, PHP is a big deal, because people have put a lot of work into content management systems (WordPress, Joomla, Drupal, Magento) that use it to let ordinary people do creative stuff and make money, with very minimal investment. Those people don't care that they're using PHP. How much does PHP suck? It sucks so hard that if you direct enough traffic at a .php file that contains straight HTML -- that contains no PHP at all -- that the CPU cost of firing up PHP and having it look at this file and decide do nothing but regurgitate it will cause your account to be suspended on shared hosting. And not unreasonably; 'overselling' doesn't have a whole lot to do with your ability to rack up ten times more CPU seconds than anyone else on the server. OK, it requires a lot of traffic, but it happens, and people are surprised when it does. The proposed answers to PHP's suckage (e.g., from CMS producers, from Zend, from alleged competitors like CMS systems in Perl) all go like this: first, get dedicated resources; second, hire a developer; third, set up this elaborate system, and then-- basically they miss the point from the get-go. One of the hot things in Perl is the Dancer framework, and I spent ages looking for a quick tutorial on how to get that running on shared hosting, and there isn't any such tutorial. You can do it though - badly; And if you complain, the only way they know how to help you make it better is to miss the point. But shared hosting, these days, isn't just a little web UI with a button that you can use to install your PHP CMS of choice. They give you an account on a normal-ish unix box and you can run all kinds of stuff, provided that you understand the environment. Typically, under shared hosting, PHP sites aren't using persistent processes. A PHP process is fired up on every individual request that isn't for a static asset like an image or a CSS file, and it generates some HTML. It might also generate a cache file of the generated HTML that mod_rewrite rules (or another PHP process) can pull the HTML from instead. Even if you have process limits (and you always have SOME resource limit that concurrent running PHP processes would eventually hit), you can handle large numbers of requests per second because each request's PHP process finishes fast enough for all the rest of the requests to come through. So you want a process to start up, do its work, and then go away as quickly as possible, while consuming as little CPU as possible. (memory usage is much less important, yes even on shared hosting.) You use standard I/O and environment variables to do this; possibly, you connect to a database server or an SMTP server over the local network. So I'll just leave this here: https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/gforth/Docs-html/Startup-speed.html .... oh, and ANS Forth is such an obstacle that a Forth CMS might come with a little slot that customers can put money into to make their sites work more betterer. I sure wish I could discard that potentiality for no benefit whatsoever. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 14:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Dec26.150812@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #35249 |
Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> writes:
>Typically, under shared hosting, PHP sites aren't using persistent
>processes. A PHP process is fired up on every individual request
That's interesting. I thought they were using technology (kludges?)
like Fast-CGI or Apache modules to get around overhead problems.
>So I'll just leave this here:
>
>https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/gforth/Docs-html/Startup-speed.html
>
>
>.... oh, and ANS Forth is such an obstacle that a Forth CMS might
>come with a little slot that customers can put money into to make
>their sites work more betterer. I sure wish I could discard that
>potentiality for no benefit whatsoever.
Sorry, that was not clear enough to understand what you mean.
Thinking about the issue again, it seems to me that on a system with a
fast fork, a good way to approach this problem is to have started-up
Gforth, maybe with the CMS code already loaded, and when a request
comes in fork off a process that now just needs to process the input
and generate the output, and then exits; so you get one process per
request with the benefit that requests cannot influence each other
through memory, and should be faster than the method I described in
the manual. I am not sure how one would integrate this with the
classic CGI framework; should be no problem with stuff like FastCGI or
Apache modules.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2014: http://www.euroforth.org/ef14/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-27 09:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1010ed0b-275e-4b4d-8f0e-bba430eca0d1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35272 |
On Friday, December 26, 2014 8:27:22 AM UTC-6, Anton Ertl wrote: > Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> writes: > >Typically, under shared hosting, PHP sites aren't using persistent > >processes. A PHP process is fired up on every individual request > > That's interesting. I thought they were using technology (kludges?) > like Fast-CGI or Apache modules to get around overhead problems. FastCGI is available, but so uncommon that I'm actually not certain as to *why* it's uncommon. The impression I've gotten is this: a decision to switch to it is often a decision to add an additional communications bottleneck to the performance problem you already have. Apache modules (mod_php, mod_perl) you could use on a VPS or a dedicated server, but under shared hosting they are absolutely forbidden. For starters, they're a good way to encourage webhosting customers to use insecure filesystem permissions, which is a good way to convert single-website security problems into many-website security problems. http://magazine.joomla.org/issues/issue-jan-2011/item/353-777-the-number-of-the-beast > >.... oh, and ANS Forth is such an obstacle that a Forth CMS might > >come with a little slot that customers can put money into to make > >their sites work more betterer. I sure wish I could discard that > >potentiality for no benefit whatsoever. > > Sorry, that was not clear enough to understand what you mean. Sorry, that was too combative. Here it is again: I appreciate ANS Forth because it means that I can offer implementations other than gforth to people who want to spend money improving their site without, again, having to 1. get dedicated resources, 2. hire a developer, 3. set up an elaborate system... I can say, "and if you start run into performance problems, you can purchase iForth and drop it right in and suddenly you'll have a lot more room to grow before you run into performance problems again." Or, since I don't personally expect a Forth CMS to replace my day job, I might suggest that customers buy support from Forth Inc or MPE. I'd rather have a library than a new incompatible language that merely has bits of that unwritten Forth library as its core features, because the new incompatible language loses what Forth ecosystem there is. And although I'm sure someone will chime in to scoff now at Forth's ecosystem, it's still larger and richer and more exciting than Factor's, for example. With that said, I don't know how easy it will really be to "drop [non-gforth] in". It seems to me that recognizers are a fine way to embed Forth into HTML, and AFAIK this is not yet a widespread implementation strategy. With recognizers you can have a recognizer stack that consists of 1. "hey, this has <forth> in it -- let's switch at that point to the normal Forth recognizer stack", and 2. "no <forth>? Well just TYPE it, whatever 'it' is." You lose whitespace. You might still have to parse a bit. But you don't really need to properly parse XML or build a DOM; JavaScript can handle that stuff in the browser, using the visitor's copious CPU seconds instead of your precious CPU seconds. I just know that there's no point in slamming the door on drop-in alternatives. It may strike you as contradictory that I would suggest, above, that someone purchase support instead of spending, say, a hundred dollars per month for good dedicated resources. What I suggest doesn't have that 'instead' there. People *start* by spending almost nothing, and then, if they grow, they *then* spend more to sustain the growth. Lots of people will never get past spending almost nothing, and they won't mind because it's just their family photographs or a personal blog. In 2014, I guess it's understood that such customers do not bar you from gaining as customers those who will pay you more than almost nothing. > > Thinking about the issue again, it seems to me that on a system with a > fast fork, a good way to approach this problem is to have started-up > Gforth, maybe with the CMS code already loaded, and when a request > comes in fork off a process that now just needs to process the input > and generate the output, and then exits; so you get one process per > request with the benefit that requests cannot influence each other > through memory, and should be faster than the method I described in > the manual. I am not sure how one would integrate this with the > classic CGI framework; should be no problem with stuff like FastCGI or > Apache modules. > This is one way to make use of FastCGI. Without FastCGI, it would require a persistent process plus two processes per request: one that's a fork of the persistent process, and one normal CGI process that exists just to communicate between Apache and the fork. With an Apache module... you're no longer wanting your brand new Forth CMS to work under the universe of cheap shared hosting environments, and it stops making so much sense as a competitor to PHP. WP Super Cache is a plugin for WordPress that saves the generated HTML pages in files. I mention this caching plugin in particular because one of its features is that it can add mod_rewrite rules to your website's root .htaccess file that tells Apache when to grab the cached page instead of launching WordPress. On shared hosting, with normal unix process accounting, launching WordPress and having it generate a webpage causes some amount of CPU seconds to be charged against your account. On shared hosting, with normal unix process accounting, Apache 1. reading your .htaccess, 2. determining that it should load a cached webpage, and then 3. presenting that webpage to your visitor, this charges _no_ CPU seconds to your account. (It is also so much cheaper and faster than the alternative that webhosts generally do not mind such accounting.) With WP Super Cache configured this way, if a particular URL gets linked on reddit or something, or advertised on TV, then what happens is: 1. Some visitor hits that URL. There being no cache, WordPress is fired up and the PHP process spends some amount of CPU seconds generating the webpage and saving it to a file. 2. The next ten thousand visitors who hit that URL in that hour use "no CPU seconds" to view the generated webpage from the file. This is more the kind of thing that a Forth CMS would want to do. As cheap as 'cheap' is, 'free' is pretty cheap too. But PHP, even with such caching, starts to fail under shared hosting environments once the AJAX calls and tiny chat boxes and other "web 2.0" features start to come in. This is where actually being cheap, and not faking it with cache, becomes important. A Forth CMS could, much more readily than PHP with its object caching schemes (which for security reasons often aren't available under shared hosting except in really pessimal form), also save the results of compiling its plugins, compiling its theme, compiling all the stuff that's common to its individual pages, with the result that "some visitor" doesn't just make one URL 'free' for the next ten thousand visitors, but also makes every other of your URLs *cheaper* for the next ten thousand visitors. Which is nice, for example, when Googlebot comes around. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-27 12:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87d274504o.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> |
| In reply to | #35294 |
Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> writes: > FastCGI is available, but so uncommon that I'm actually not > certain as to *why* it's uncommon. It didn't catch on much partly because the protocol is pretty ugly, partly because people tended to prefer in-memory modules. Anyway if you want to isolate requests by handling each one with a new process, FastCGI does the opposite of what you want. Apache-style preforking is probably your best bet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-29 13:08 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dca1df15-a7b9-48ab-8e1f-03657b5dcea5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35249 |
On Thursday, December 25, 2014 3:46:04 PM UTC-5, Julian Fondren wrote: > On Thursday, December 25, 2014 12:44:37 PM UTC-6, WJ wrote: > > Very nice analogy, but disciples of ANS Forth won't understand it. > > I'm afraid that they are too simple-minded to grok high-level > > languages. > > > > They are the worst enemies that Forth has ever had. > > > > If Forth is to live, then ANS Forth must die. > > Here we have the most readily and naturally extended language on > the planet, and the criticism against it is ever "This language > [without extension] is less expressive or less capable of this > task than that that language (with some libriaries) is." I wonder > in how many languages and for how many tasks you can make that > point. If you were more productive I guess you would already have > the next Factor or RetroForth or blah. > > > Meanwhile... just so you have some idea at all of the kinds of > things that actually *do* go through the heads of the 'disciples > of ANS Forth': > > Have you heard of PHP? It sucks. One of the biggest things it > sucks is CPU time and memory. It is the absolute suckiest on > shared hosting, because the hacks to make it suck less aren't safe > to use when you don't trust your users and your users also don't > trust each other. That it sucks is actually a big problem for a > lot of its users. Nonetheless, PHP is a big deal, because people > have put a lot of work into content management systems (WordPress, > Joomla, Drupal, Magento) that use it to let ordinary people do > creative stuff and make money, with very minimal investment. > Those people don't care that they're using PHP. > > How much does PHP suck? It sucks so hard that if you direct > enough traffic at a .php file that contains straight HTML -- that > contains no PHP at all -- that the CPU cost of firing up PHP and > having it look at this file and decide do nothing but regurgitate > it will cause your account to be suspended on shared hosting. And > not unreasonably; 'overselling' doesn't have a whole lot to do > with your ability to rack up ten times more CPU seconds than > anyone else on the server. OK, it requires a lot of traffic, but > it happens, and people are surprised when it does. > > The proposed answers to PHP's suckage (e.g., from CMS producers, > from Zend, from alleged competitors like CMS systems in Perl) all > go like this: first, get dedicated resources; second, hire a > developer; third, set up this elaborate system, and then-- > basically they miss the point from the get-go. One of the hot > things in Perl is the Dancer framework, and I spent ages looking > for a quick tutorial on how to get that running on shared hosting, > and there isn't any such tutorial. You can do it though - badly; > And if you complain, the only way they know how to help you make > it better is to miss the point. > > But shared hosting, these days, isn't just a little web UI with a > button that you can use to install your PHP CMS of choice. > They give you an account on a normal-ish unix box and you can run > all kinds of stuff, provided that you understand the environment. > > Typically, under shared hosting, PHP sites aren't using persistent > processes. A PHP process is fired up on every individual request > that isn't for a static asset like an image or a CSS file, and it > generates some HTML. It might also generate a cache file of the > generated HTML that mod_rewrite rules (or another PHP process) can > pull the HTML from instead. Even if you have process limits (and > you always have SOME resource limit that concurrent running PHP > processes would eventually hit), you can handle large numbers of > requests per second because each request's PHP process finishes > fast enough for all the rest of the requests to come through. > > So you want a process to start up, do its work, and then go away > as quickly as possible, while consuming as little CPU as possible. > (memory usage is much less important, yes even on shared hosting.) > You use standard I/O and environment variables to do this; > possibly, you connect to a database server or an SMTP server over > the local network. > > So I'll just leave this here: > > https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/gforth/Docs-html/Startup-speed.html > > > .... oh, and ANS Forth is such an obstacle that a Forth CMS might > come with a little slot that customers can put money into to make > their sites work more betterer. I sure wish I could discard that > potentiality for no benefit whatsoever. > > -- Julian The MIT has another approach to tackle Web-Design - Ur/Web: "Ur/Web lets developers write Web applications as self-contained programs. The language's compiler ... automatically generates the corresponding XML code and style-sheet specifications and embeds the JavaScript and database code in the right places." Source: Taking the grunt work out of Web development - New programming language automatically coordinates interactions between Web page components. http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2014/new-programming-language-coordinates-web-page-components-1223 "Ur supports a powerful kind of metaprogramming. The Ur/Web compiler also produces very efficient object code that does not use garbage collection. These compiled programs will often be even more efficient than what most programmers would bother to write in C. For example, the standalone web server generated ... uses less RAM than the bash shell. The compiler also generates JavaScript versions of client-side code, with no need to write those parts of applications in a different language. The implementation of all this is open source." Source: The Ur Programming Language Family http://www.impredicative.com/ur/ "The World Wide Web has evolved gradually from a document delivery platform to an architecture for distributed programming. This largely unplanned evolution is apparent in the set of interconnected languages and protocols that any Web application must manage. This paper presents Ur/Web, a domain-specific, statically typed functional programming language with a much simpler model for programming modern Web applications. Ur/Web's model is unified, where programs in a single programming language are compiled to other "Web standards" languages as needed; supports novel kinds of encapsulation of Web-specific state; and exposes simple concurrency, where programmers can reason about distributed, multithreaded applications via a mix of transactions and cooperative preemption" Source: Ur/Web: A Simple Model for Programming the Web http://adam.chlipala.net/papers/UrWebPOPL15/UrWebPOPL15.pdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mix <mix@test.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-23 20:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7cidu$hsv$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #35139 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > mix <mix@test.net> writes: >> The reason for that is lack of good teachers. Assembler is no any more >> complicated than any other programming language, but many things are done >> differently in assembly code. > > Assembly is harder to debug mostly because of its complete lack of > memory safety, so it's easy for a buggy program to clobber data > belonging to some other part of the program, that doesn't cause > observable misbehaviour until the other part of the program runs and you > have to diagnose what happened to it. > > If a program in a safe language has a similar bug, then it crashes with > an understandable diagnostic as soon as the buggy code tries writing to > the wrong place; or better yet, the error is found at compile time, say > through type checking. Not sure what are you talking about. You can implement OOP or type checking in Assembler same as you can do it in Forth. Moreover, ANS Forth and Assembler are completely same considering this particular problem. The difference with VB or some similar language would be the fact that *you* have to implement safety facilities. It's not very complicated, but most people decide not do deal with it, I hope you understand why. Google "Assembler OOP", for example. If you're really interested, I can write you trivial safe type implementation. > There is also the far higher amount of code you have to write to do even > the simplest things, compared to an HLL. -- mix x
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mix <mix@test.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-23 20:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7cit6$ipt$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #35139 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > mix <mix@test.net> writes: >> The reason for that is lack of good teachers. Assembler is no any more >> complicated than any other programming language, but many things are done >> differently in assembly code. > > Assembly is harder to debug mostly because of its complete lack of > memory safety, so it's easy for a buggy program to clobber data > belonging to some other part of the program, that doesn't cause > observable misbehaviour until the other part of the program runs and you > have to diagnose what happened to it. > > If a program in a safe language has a similar bug, then it crashes with > an understandable diagnostic as soon as the buggy code tries writing to > the wrong place; or better yet, the error is found at compile time, say > through type checking. > > There is also the far higher amount of code you have to write to do even > the simplest things, compared to an HLL. That's not exactly true. The amount of constructs is limited in Assembler same as in HLL. It's true that code will be longer in terms of bytes, but it's not mean you'll spend more time typing it. Programmers do not spend most of their time typing things. -- mix x
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-23 12:39 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7xa92ew16a.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #35149 |
mix <mix@test.net> writes:
> That's not exactly true. The amount of constructs is limited in Assembler
> same as in HLL. It's true that code will be longer in terms of bytes, but
> it's not mean you'll spend more time typing it.
I get the impression you've never used an HLL. For this purpose, an HLL
means something with type safety, garbage collection, and preferably
first class functions (like Python and Javascript but probably unlike
VB). Here is the notorious Quicksort example in Haskell:
quicksort [] = []
quicksort (p:xs) = (quicksort lesser) ++ [p] ++ (quicksort greater)
where
lesser = filter (< p) xs
greater = filter (>= p) xs
Like any small program this doesn't rely much on types, but it relies on
GC to clean up intermediate results, and it uses a higher-order function
(filter) that takes more cognitive overhead in assembler. Someone
familiar with the algorithm could have written the above in about 2
minutes. I don't think even an expert could implement something
comparable in assembler in less than 10x that much time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-23 15:16 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <rJydnUv038YERgTJnZ2dnUU7-dGdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #35152 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > Here is the notorious Quicksort example in Haskell: And it's a terrible implementation of quicksort. > quicksort [] = [] > quicksort (p:xs) = (quicksort lesser) ++ [p] ++ (quicksort greater) > where > lesser = filter (< p) xs > greater = filter (>= p) xs > > Like any small program this doesn't rely much on types, but it relies on > GC to clean up intermediate results, and it uses a higher-order function > (filter) that takes more cognitive overhead in assembler. Someone > familiar with the algorithm could have written the above in about 2 > minutes. I don't think even an expert could implement something > comparable in assembler in less than 10x that much time. Probably not, but it would be much better. It would be in-place so it wouldn't generate any garbage, and it would make a more intelligent choice of pivot, and it would only stack what was necessary, and it would have the tight inner loop which is what really makes quicksort fast. It's like comparing a little toy car that you push along with your feet with something you'd drive to work. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-23 17:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7xzjadzuym.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #35154 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
> And it's a terrible implementation of quicksort.
It's illustrative.
> it would have the tight inner loop which is what really makes
> quicksort fast.
It's the O(n log n) asymptotic speed (with non-pathological data) that
makes quicksort fast, compared with the quadratic algorithms (no matter
how optmized) one still finds in programs where the implementer didn't
know better or have a good library routine available.
This was a real issue in a crufty old C program that I used to work on.
It had what amounted to a quadratic-time selection sort, smeared all
through a subsystem with 1000's of LOC doing stuff unrelated to sorting,
that was causing performance problems in an embedded system. Factoring
out the sorting stuff to a routine with a straightforwardly coded,
reasonable algorithm fixed the issue much better than adding any amount
more micro-optimization to the quadratic version (which already had a
lot, at the cost of clarity).
> It's like comparing a little toy car that you push along with your
> feet with something you'd drive to work.
Sure, you have to start somewhere. FWIW, here's a merge sort that I
wrote in less than 10 minutes, that avoids all the quicksort problems
about pivot selection etc. Of particular note is the function
prop_msort xs = msort xs == sort xs
This function takes a list of ints, sorts it with both msort and the
library sort routine, and returns True iff the results are the same.
The type signature is inferred from the one on msort.
Then the "main" function calls quickCheck on prop_msort. quickCheck
generates a bunch (default 100) of test cases that are random lists of
ints, and calls prop_msort to make sure that msort correctly sorts all
these random lists. How does it know to generate random lists of ints
instead of, say, random characters? Again, it figures it out from the
type signature. So you get lightweight automatic generation of random
test suites, that often find stuff that manually written unit tests
miss.
I think it would be pretty hard to write something that general and
convenient for asm programs, because of the QuichCheck's use of type
inference in figuring out what test values to generate. Although, there
is something like it for Erlang (dynamically typed) that I haven't yet
tried.
I cheated a little with the [Int]->[Int] type signature since the
more general signature would be
Ord a => [a] -> [a]
to sort lists of any type with an ordering relation. That works fine,
but to use QuickCheck I would have had to give it a bit more info about
how to generate arbitrary instances since the concrete type is unknown.
That it can do lists of ints (floats, chars, etc) though is pretty good.
================================================================
import Data.List
import Test.QuickCheck
msort :: [Int] -> [Int]
msort xs
| n < 2 = xs
| otherwise = merge (msort x1s) (msort x2s)
where
n = length xs
(x1s,x2s) = splitAt (n`div`2) xs
merge xs ys = case (xs,ys) of
([], ys') -> ys'
(xs', []) -> xs'
(x:xs',y:ys') | x < y -> x : merge xs' ys
| otherwise -> y : merge xs ys'
prop_msort xs = msort xs == sort xs
main = quickCheck prop_msort
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-24 05:34 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20141224053452.5b58c1c7@maxa-pc> |
| In reply to | #35167 |
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 17:40:17 -0800 Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: > > And it's a terrible implementation of quicksort. > > It's illustrative. > > > it would have the tight inner loop which is what really makes > > quicksort fast. > > It's the O(n log n) asymptotic speed (with non-pathological data) that > makes quicksort fast, compared with the quadratic algorithms (no > matter how optmized) one still finds in programs where the > implementer didn't know better or have a good library routine > available. > > This was a real issue in a crufty old C program that I used to work > on. It had what amounted to a quadratic-time selection sort, smeared > all through a subsystem with 1000's of LOC doing stuff unrelated to > sorting, that was causing performance problems in an embedded > system. Factoring out the sorting stuff to a routine with a > straightforwardly coded, reasonable algorithm fixed the issue much > better than adding any amount more micro-optimization to the > quadratic version (which already had a lot, at the cost of clarity). > > > It's like comparing a little toy car that you push along with your > > feet with something you'd drive to work. > > Sure, you have to start somewhere. FWIW, here's a merge sort that I > wrote in less than 10 minutes, that avoids all the quicksort problems > about pivot selection etc. Of particular note is the function > > prop_msort xs = msort xs == sort xs > > This function takes a list of ints, sorts it with both msort and the > library sort routine, and returns True iff the results are the same. > The type signature is inferred from the one on msort. > > Then the "main" function calls quickCheck on prop_msort. quickCheck > generates a bunch (default 100) of test cases that are random lists of > ints, and calls prop_msort to make sure that msort correctly sorts all > these random lists. How does it know to generate random lists of ints > instead of, say, random characters? Again, it figures it out from the > type signature. So you get lightweight automatic generation of random > test suites, that often find stuff that manually written unit tests > miss. > > I think it would be pretty hard to write something that general and > convenient for asm programs, because of the QuichCheck's use of type > inference in figuring out what test values to generate. Although, > there is something like it for Erlang (dynamically typed) that I > haven't yet tried. > > I cheated a little with the [Int]->[Int] type signature since the > more general signature would be > > Ord a => [a] -> [a] > > to sort lists of any type with an ordering relation. That works fine, > but to use QuickCheck I would have had to give it a bit more info > about how to generate arbitrary instances since the concrete type is > unknown. That it can do lists of ints (floats, chars, etc) though is > pretty good. > > ================================================================ > > import Data.List > import Test.QuickCheck > > msort :: [Int] -> [Int] > msort xs > | n < 2 = xs > | otherwise = merge (msort x1s) (msort x2s) > where > n = length xs O(n) > (x1s,x2s) = splitAt (n`div`2) xs O(n) > merge xs ys = case (xs,ys) of > ([], ys') -> ys' > (xs', []) -> xs' > (x:xs',y:ys') | x < y -> x : merge xs' ys > | otherwise -> y : merge xs ys' > > prop_msort xs = msort xs == sort xs > > main = quickCheck prop_msort Anyway I really don't know why Haskell insists on using linked lists when , actually is pretty useless data structure for everything but toy examples. eg string as linked list, pleeeaaazeee.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-23 21:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7xh9wl7hsk.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #35169 |
Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> writes: >> n = length xs > O(n) >> (x1s,x2s) = splitAt (n`div`2) xs > O(n) Yes, sorting is O(n log n) at best, so doing an O(n) operation is fine. Note those steps are really O(n) for the whole algorithm since the list involved are smaller by half at each level. Maybe those two steps could be combined somehow as a micro-optimization but it works fine as is. > Anyway I really don't know why Haskell insists on using > linked lists when , actually is pretty useless data structure > for everything but toy examples. That example sorts 100k ints in about 0.1 sec which is fine for all kinds of purposes. A compiled Forth implementation of an in-place algorithm could probably do better, but I think most people use interpreted Forth which might not do as well. > eg string as linked list, pleeeaaazeee. Yes, better to use Data.Text for stuff with lots of strings.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-24 12:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Dec24.134022@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #35170 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>That example sorts 100k ints in about 0.1 sec which is fine for all
>kinds of purposes. A compiled Forth implementation of an in-place
>algorithm could probably do better, but I think most people use
>interpreted Forth which might not do as well.
As it happens, <2013Aug15.191549@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> contains
data on that:
|Here they are (on a 3GHz Core 2 Duo E8400); the numbers are the user
|times in seconds.
|
|gforth-fast 64-bit
|m-a m r i i2 d
...
|3.22 3.11 3.16 3.12 3.14 3.53 100000 * 100
|vfxlin
|m-a m r i i2 d
...
|1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.12 100000 * 100
...
|
|The line "100000 * 100" indicates that an array with 100000 elements
|was filled 100 times with pseudo-random numbers and sorted.
So gforth-fast takes 0.03s for 100k 64-bit ints, three times faster
than your Haskell program. I leave it to you whether you consider
gforth-fast to be an interpreted Forth. If not, what makes you think
that most people use an interpreted Forth?
Vfxlin takes 0.01s for 100k 32-bit ints, ten times faster than your
Haskell program.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2014: http://www.euroforth.org/ef14/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-24 09:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7xk31heyjd.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #35183 |
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: > So gforth-fast takes 0.03s for 100k 64-bit ints, three times faster > than your Haskell program. Nice. That's actually quite a bit faster than Python sorting 100k pseudo-random floats, and that's in a Python array rather than a linked list, using Python's library sorting routine which is written in optimized C, but which has to be type-generic with runtime dispatch for comparisons. Can I ask what the coding time was for the Forth version? The debugging time? The amount of time spent testing before you felt confident that the code worked? Thanks.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-25 08:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7gj7r$ovu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #35192 |
Paul Rubin wrote: > Can I ask what the coding time was for the Forth version? The debugging > time? The amount of time spent testing before you felt confident that > the code worked? Thanks. You can ask, but he doesn't want to answer honestly. Disciples of ANS Forth have no desire to increase programmer productivity. They want to keep Forth hobbled; they want it to be suitable only for programming embedded controllers. Some of them are so mentally limited that they cannot grasp high-level languages. They are like the caveman who was disturbed and agitated when he first saw a round wheel. It puzzled him so that he declared that only the decadent and wicked would use it and that he would stick with the old reliable square wheels.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mix <mix@test.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-25 09:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7gkos$rd$1@news.mixmin.net> |
| In reply to | #35219 |
"WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> wrote: > Paul Rubin wrote: > >> Can I ask what the coding time was for the Forth version? The debugging >> time? The amount of time spent testing before you felt confident that >> the code worked? Thanks. > > You can ask, but he doesn't want to answer honestly. > > Disciples of ANS Forth have no desire to increase programmer > productivity. > > They want to keep Forth hobbled; they want it to be suitable > only for programming embedded controllers. > > Some of them are so mentally limited that they cannot grasp > high-level languages. > > They are like the caveman who was disturbed and agitated when > he first saw a round wheel. It puzzled him so that he declared > that only the decadent and wicked would use it and that he > would stick with the old reliable square wheels. Lol, you're a poor troll, let me pet you. -- mix x
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web