Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #34055 > unrolled thread

How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-10-21 04:50 -0700
    Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-10-22 02:37 -0700
      Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-10-22 09:57 -1000
        Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-10-22 14:11 -0700
          Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-10-22 23:08 +0100
            Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? "Rod Pemberton" <buzzoff@nonamewhichexists.cmm> - 2014-10-22 23:02 -0400
              Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-10-22 18:26 -1000
              Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-10-23 21:32 +0100
        Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-10-22 23:14 +0200
          Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-10-22 13:23 -1000
            Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-10-24 14:34 +0200
              Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? beeflobill@gmail.com - 2014-12-05 12:28 -0800
                Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-05 12:44 -0800
                Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-12-05 16:20 -0500
                Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-05 13:43 -0800
                Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-12-05 18:24 -1000
                  Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-06 10:23 -0800
                  Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2014-12-06 18:24 -0800
                    Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-12-06 22:59 -0500
                      Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2014-12-06 21:03 -0800
                        Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-12-07 04:14 -0500
                        Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-12-07 09:04 -0800
                          Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2014-12-07 19:23 -0800
                            Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2014-12-07 19:30 -0800
                          Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-08 09:35 +0000
                            Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2014-12-08 12:53 +0100
                              Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-12-08 14:11 -0800
                                Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2014-12-09 00:02 +0100
                    Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-07 21:50 +0000
                      Re: How popular is Forth really, compared to others, any guess? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-12-07 23:00 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#34832

On 12/7/2014 12:03 AM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, December 6, 2014 8:59:59 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote:
>> On 12/6/2014 9:24 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, December 5, 2014 9:24:31 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>>>
>>>> Aloha,
>>>> Elizabeth
>>>
>>> Didn't you have to leave Hawaii after the assassination attempt?
>>
>> I make a point of not replying to you when you post crap, but I feel I
>> should respond when you are just plain being evil.  You really are out
>> of line when you say stuff like this.  It shows just how mean spirited
>> you are and what a low person you can be.
>>
>> You rant all day long about how crappy Forth Inc products are and how
>> badly you have been mistreated by the world.  But there is no call for
>> you to pick on others here.  It really drags down the group.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick
>
> You're just a suck-up. This is what I mean about ANS-Forth being a cult --- ANS-Forth is a complete failure from a technical standpoint --- all ANS-Forth has going for it is loyalty from sycophants such as yourself.

Your statement of my being an ANS-Forth cult member is a total 
fabrication on your part.  This is what I mean about your usual rants. 
I didn't say a word about Forth or Rather or Forth, Inc.  I only 
complained about your insults to others.  I just don't like it when you 
get personal about anyone here.  You seem to mostly go off about Rather, 
so that is when you bug me the most.  That is your selection, not mine.

I think I understand why you are the way you are, but I don't understand 
why you blame everyone else for your problems rather than looking at 
yourself.  I guess that is the very nature of your problem.

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34835

On Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:03:18 PM UTC-6, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> STRUCTS STRUCTS STRUCTS
> 

http://www.forth200x.org/structures.html

https://code.google.com/p/ffl/wiki/stc

https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/gforth/Docs-html/Structures.html#Structures

http://win32forth.sourceforge.net/doc/p-structures.htm

The SwiftForth Manual (free with an eval copy) describes SWOOP in
section 10.

Programming Forth at http://www.mpeforth.com/books.htm introduces
structs in Chapter 8

The first Forth I paid for, Quartus Forth, for the Palm Pilot,
mentions (without documenting) STRUCT FIELD and END-STRUCT in its
online manual.

Nobody is picking up Forth, failing to find a way to create data
structures, and then giving up on the language.  Your stupid and
ugly crusade is completely fucking pointless.

> 
> LOCALS LOCALS LOCALS
>

One of the forths I've used, it had an .S with 'backwards
output'.  I.e., accidently very natural output to use with
LOCALS| .  I thought it was weird: it just makes more sense when
you can type 1 2 3 to then picture 1 2 3 in that order on the
stack.  I thought it was weird; I didn't think it was crippling
or horrifying or unusable or confusing.

But suppose someone said to you, yep, you're totally right, Hugh!
A locals syntax that has TOS at the left rather than the right is
the biggest reason that Forth lost.  Suppose that everyone said
that, and then threw a little party for you, where you got to
blow out a cake, where the candles formed LOCALS| , and once
removed from the cake everyone could see {: :} clearly written in
delicious chocolate cream?

What would you then do?

Why not go ahead and do that thing, whatever it is, and then shut
up forever about LOCALS| ?  People don't even care enough to
oppose you. Your stupid and ugly crusade is *boring*.

>
> RATHER RATHER RATHER
>

Your insults damn you if false.  They also damn you if they're
true.  Do you understand what an absolute failure of a position
that is?  You're either savaging the respectable or you're
savaging the crippled.  Your attacks are unjustified or cruel.
There is no positive outcome for you.  You will never be the
hero.  Nobody will ever recognize the awesomeness of your
speaking truth to power.  So please: every time your little bile
bag fills up, instead of vomiting its contents all over yourself
in view of this forum, try diluting it with bleach.


-- Julian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34839

On Sunday, December 7, 2014 10:04:51 AM UTC-7, Julian Fondren wrote:
> On Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:03:18 PM UTC-6, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > STRUCTS STRUCTS STRUCTS
> > 
> 
> http://www.forth200x.org/structures.html
> 
> https://code.google.com/p/ffl/wiki/stc
> 
> https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/gforth/Docs-html/Structures.html#Structures
> 
> http://win32forth.sourceforge.net/doc/p-structures.htm
> 
> The SwiftForth Manual (free with an eval copy) describes SWOOP in
> section 10.
> 
> Programming Forth at http://www.mpeforth.com/books.htm introduces
> structs in Chapter 8
> 
> The first Forth I paid for, Quartus Forth, for the Palm Pilot,
> mentions (without documenting) STRUCT FIELD and END-STRUCT in its
> online manual.
> 
> Nobody is picking up Forth, failing to find a way to create data
> structures, and then giving up on the language.  Your stupid and
> ugly crusade is completely fucking pointless.

SWOOP is incredibly inefficient. I'm talking about basic structs --- these are not described in any Forth Inc. book --- I didn't even know what structs were until I learned C, because I had only read Forth Inc. books up until that time (this was 25 years ago).

> > 
> > LOCALS LOCALS LOCALS
> >
> 
> One of the forths I've used, it had an .S with 'backwards
> output'.  I.e., accidently very natural output to use with
> LOCALS| .  I thought it was weird: it just makes more sense when
> you can type 1 2 3 to then picture 1 2 3 in that order on the
> stack.  I thought it was weird; I didn't think it was crippling
> or horrifying or unusable or confusing.
> 
> But suppose someone said to you, yep, you're totally right, Hugh!
> A locals syntax that has TOS at the left rather than the right is
> the biggest reason that Forth lost.  Suppose that everyone said
> that, and then threw a little party for you, where you got to
> blow out a cake, where the candles formed LOCALS| , and once
> removed from the cake everyone could see {: :} clearly written in
> delicious chocolate cream?
> 
> What would you then do?
> 
> Why not go ahead and do that thing, whatever it is, and then shut
> up forever about LOCALS| ?  People don't even care enough to
> oppose you. Your stupid and ugly crusade is *boring*.

{: :} are Anton's screwed-up solution --- he is failing to zero out the locals to the right of the | --- I've covered this before.

I think that Elizabeth Rather made the whole Forth community look stupid by specifying the parameters to be backwards. Forth Inc. wasn't even able to get (LOCAL) to work without crashing SwiftForth until years after ANS-Forth came out, which shows that LOCALS| was put in the standard without ever being tested even once --- this is just gross incompetence.

> > RATHER RATHER RATHER
> >
> 
> Your insults damn you if false.  They also damn you if they're
> true.  Do you understand what an absolute failure of a position
> that is?  You're either savaging the respectable or you're
> savaging the crippled.  Your attacks are unjustified or cruel.
> There is no positive outcome for you.  You will never be the
> hero.  Nobody will ever recognize the awesomeness of your
> speaking truth to power.  So please: every time your little bile
> bag fills up, instead of vomiting its contents all over yourself
> in view of this forum, try diluting it with bleach.

You're assuming that Forth Inc. in necessary to the Forth community somehow --- in fact, Forth Inc. is the reason why Forth has been an epic failure --- only when Forth Inc. goes out of business, will Forth have any chance to be taken seriously.

Nobody really takes Forth seriously at this time --- nobody has taken Forth seriously in 20 years --- outside of comp.lang.forth, Forth is either completely unknown, or is considered to be a tasteless joke.

So long as the cult of ANS-Forth persists, Forth will continue to be considered a tasteless joke --- if Forthers want Forth to be taken seriously, they have to stop pretending that Elizabeth Rather is a programmer, and just abandon Forth Inc. completely --- there is no other way for Forth to succeed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34840

Elizabeth Rather has never posted any code on comp.lang.forth that she didn't copy directly out of the "Starting Forth" book, and she usually messes that up because she tries to do it from memory. She is not a programmer.

This following passage, really shows a complete failure to understand the concept of general-purpose data-structures --- this is the fundamental problem with Elizabeth Rather being a self-described "leading expert" in Forth --- this is why Elizabeth Rather and Leon Wagner need to be kicked out of the Forth-200x committee if Forth-200x is going to be taken seriously by anybody in the real world.

On Thursday, September 26, 2013 12:09:59 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: 
> On 9/26/13 2:27 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote: 
> > In article <043a32ac-c009-4aff-beda-aa4041daadcb@googlegroups.com>, 
> >   <hughag...@yahoo.com> wrote: 
> >> On Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:44:35 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: 
> >>> But my point is that you can define data objects to behave *exactly* the 
> >>> way you want them to, to solve the problem at hand. 
> 
> >> I totally disagree with this. It is foolish to custom-implement basic 
> >> data structures such as arrays for every application. It is easy to 
> >> write a general-purpose array or linked-list or whatever, that works 
> >> exactly the way that you want it to for *every* application. 
  
> Does "*every* application" you write use exactly the same kind of data 
> arranged in the same way? If so, having written it once you can reuse it 
> often. If not, you either have to rearrange your data to make it work or 
> modify your "general-purpose" structure. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34842

Julian Fondren wrote:


> You're either savaging the respectable or you're
> savaging the crippled. 

You admit that Rather may be mentally crippled.
If she is mentally crippled, then why should she
be accepted as an expert?


(use gauche.sequence)
(use srfi-13)

(define the-string (string-upcase
    "> RATHER RATHER RATHER
    >

    Your insults damn you if false.  They also damn you if they're
    true.  Do you understand what an absolute failure of a position
    that is?  You're either savaging the respectable or you're
    savaging the crippled.  Your attacks are unjustified or cruel.
    There is no positive outcome for you.  You will never be the
    hero.  Nobody will ever recognize the awesomeness of your
    speaking truth to power.  So please: every time your little bile
    bag fills up, instead of vomiting its contents all over yourself
    in view of this forum, try diluting it with bleach.


    -- Julian"))

(define words (string-tokenize the-string #[A-Z]))

(define (pick-letters . indices) (list (permute the-string indices)))

(define (pick-words . indices) (permute words indices))

(string-join
  (append
    (pick-words 77 100 6 43 32)
    (pick-letters 12 57 205 12 58 3 44)
    (pick-words 7 2 28 41)
    (pick-letters 52 38 52 52 73)))

  ===>
"LITTLE JULIAN YOU ARE SAVAGING HUGH AS IF RATHER IS YOUR MOMMY"

-- 
"A woman's place is in the home." --- Wise old saying

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34843

WJ <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Julian Fondren wrote:
> 
> 
> > You're either savaging the respectable or you're
> > savaging the crippled. 
> 
> You admit that Rather may be mentally crippled.

This comment only proves that *you* are mentally crippled.
Fuck off, arsehole.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34844

On Monday, December 8, 2014 11:53:47 AM UTC, Alexander Wegel wrote:
> WJ <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > Julian Fondren wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > You're either savaging the respectable or you're
> > > savaging the crippled. 
> > 
> > You admit that Rather may be mentally crippled.
> 
> This comment only proves that *you* are mentally crippled.
> Fuck off, arsehole.

who do you mean?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34845

JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> wrote:

> On Monday, December 8, 2014 11:53:47 AM UTC, Alexander Wegel wrote:
> > WJ <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Julian Fondren wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > You're either savaging the respectable or you're
> > > > savaging the crippled. 
> > > 
> > > You admit that Rather may be mentally crippled.
> > 
> > This comment only proves that *you* are mentally crippled.
> > Fuck off, arsehole.
> 
> who do you mean?

Guess.
Hint: I responded to his post.
Another hint: if i were Rod, i probably would have already asked him if
he's Hugh in disguise..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34836

hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:


> That "Forth Programmer's Handbook" was written at a
> time when (LOCAL) would crash SwiftForth if used ---
> Elizabeth Rather didn't know what local variables were
> either ---


Locals are important.  In the thread on summing the squares of
the two largest integers of three, this appeared:


> In that thread, Payson posted this code:
> 
> : sq ( n -- n ) dup * ; 
> : g ( a b c -- n )  2dup max sq >r min max sq r> + ; 
> 
> That was the best, I thought.


Let's put all of that code on one line:

: sq ( n -- n ) dup * ; : g ( a b c -- n )  2dup max sq >r min max sq r> + ; 

Now, let's rewrite it using locals:

: g { a b c -- d } b c max dup * b c min a max dup * + ;

Easier to write, easier to read, easier to understand, easier to debug,
and shorter.

However, some Forth groupies have a mystical belief in the wickedness
of local variables and the holiness of obfuscated stack-juggling.

Some Forth groupies are unwilling or unable to learn anything except
the lowest-level concepts.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#34838

WJ wrote:
> : sq ( n -- n ) dup * ; : g ( a b c -- n )  2dup max sq >r min max sq r> +
> : ;
> 
> Now, let's rewrite it using locals:
> 
> : g { a b c -- d } b c max dup * b c min a max dup * + ;

You really should keep sq as factor, because "dup *" certainly is *not* 
using locals, but the stack.

: sq { a -- n } a a * ;

> Easier to write, easier to read, easier to understand, easier to debug,
> and shorter.

Or if you write it without factoring, it becomes:

: g ( a b c -- n ) 2dup max dup * >r min max dup * r> + ;

Woops, it is one letter shorter than the locals version.  The factoring is 
there to make it easier to read, not to make it shorter.

BTW: I think taking the squares to the end makes it more readable:

: g ( a b c -- n ) 2dup max >r min max  dup * r> dup * + ;

You see the separation of "get the biggest and the second biggest number" 
and "add the two squares", which are really two tasks you have to solve 
here.

BTW: Don't use "d" as stack comment if you are not returning a double cell.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web