Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #38814 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-05-04 09:44 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-05-08 16:22 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 112 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
FORTH - How Does It Work? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-04 09:44 -0700
FORTH - How Does It Work? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-05-04 10:21 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-04 11:00 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-05-05 03:03 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-05-05 11:31 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-05-05 01:31 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-05-05 08:49 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-05-05 11:16 +0200
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-05-05 02:33 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-05-04 08:49 -1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-05-04 19:13 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-04 20:35 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-05-04 10:43 -1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-05-05 08:52 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-05 10:54 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-05 10:56 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> - 2015-05-04 20:01 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-04 17:23 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-04 17:34 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-05-05 00:25 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-05-05 12:41 +0200
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> - 2015-05-05 03:31 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-05 08:41 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-05-05 11:36 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-05-07 11:26 +1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-05-06 16:46 -1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-05-07 00:06 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-05-10 12:57 +1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-09 21:36 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-05-09 18:36 -1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-09 22:09 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-05-10 13:38 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2015-05-10 14:23 -0500
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-10 20:51 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-05-11 01:18 +0200
Apology to Walter Banks - was [Re: FORTH - How Does It Work?] Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2015-05-10 23:09 -0500
Re: Apology to Walter Banks - was [Re: FORTH - How Does It Work?] Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-05-11 07:24 -0400
Re: Apology to Walter Banks - was [Re: FORTH - How Does It Work?] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 11:34 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-10 19:18 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-05-11 07:50 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? beeflo <beeflobill@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 09:37 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-11 11:32 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-05-12 05:21 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-12 14:08 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-05-12 14:52 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-12 17:18 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-05-13 08:41 +0200
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-13 08:07 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-13 19:29 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-05-12 08:10 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-12 17:13 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-12 09:33 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-05-12 15:38 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-12 21:51 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-12 16:05 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-14 17:26 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? bettilyona@gmail.com - 2015-06-02 10:21 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-06-02 20:39 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? bettilyona@gmail.com - 2015-06-08 13:14 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 13:15 +0200
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-06-20 14:37 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-06-20 08:23 -1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-06-20 19:24 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2015-06-21 12:30 +0200
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-06-21 20:58 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-06-22 00:13 +0200
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-05-11 12:10 +1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 11:35 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-11 16:52 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-05-11 08:12 -1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-11 12:37 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-05-11 15:59 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-11 21:34 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 16:42 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-11 21:52 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-11 14:55 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-12 16:22 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-12 22:42 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-13 11:18 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-25 15:04 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 20:38 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-11 14:31 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-05-12 07:06 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-11 21:30 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-11 14:52 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 20:40 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-05-12 03:38 +0200
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 22:10 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-11 20:25 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-05-12 01:13 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-12 11:03 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-05-12 16:08 +0200
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-05-12 14:04 +0000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-11 19:08 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 22:46 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-05-14 18:30 +1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-05-13 22:55 -1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-05-16 05:08 +1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-05-15 09:54 -1000
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-20 13:59 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-14 10:40 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-05-14 03:12 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-14 12:03 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-10 22:09 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-11 10:12 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-11 18:57 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-11 11:48 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-05-11 20:28 +0100
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-12 21:28 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 11:29 -0400
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? Ching-Tang Tseng <ilikeforth@gmail.com> - 2015-05-04 19:40 -0700
Re: FORTH - How Does It Work? tthomas@duelcraft2.com - 2015-05-08 16:22 -0700
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 20:38 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <miri0r$l9r$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38992 |
On 5/11/2015 4:52 PM, Alex McDonald wrote: > you're right. Hey, I'm going to have this post bronzed or something... It's not very often anyone on the Internet says I'm right about anything. lol -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 14:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4d4ad138-8e45-460a-94b4-48062a67592a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38988 |
On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 11:12:04 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> On 5/11/15 5:52 AM, Alex McDonald wrote:
> > 2. The Forth200x standards group doesn't represent Forth users or
> > companies that produce and use Forth products. The standards group
> > defines the language.
>
> Good summary, thank you, Alex.
On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 12:59:39 PM UTC-7, Walter Banks wrote:
> On 11/05/2015 3:37 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Well, paste a tin-foil star on your little sycophant's
> > forehead --- he declared plainly that Forth-200x doesn't
> > represent the Forth users
>
> That is the part that you have been missing in this discussion.
> Standards represent what currently exists. They codify the existing
> practice. That is also why they get revised periodically.
So, I'm the one who doesn't understand who a standards group represents? Since I don't understand, perhaps we should ask Alex McDonald and Elizabeth Rather to explain --- oh, wait! --- they already did.
Standards represent what currently exists? You mean, the 40+ years of Forth code that was written by the Forth users?
I think your effort at brown-nosing has made you blind to the elephant in the room --- you can't see past what is in front of your nose.
This reminds me of a book I read on mind-control. According to the book, there are three kinds of shit:
1.) chicken-shit --- what people say to cover up the fact that they have nothing to say; i.e. most of the threads on C.L.F.
2.) elephant-shit --- grandiose claims of importance; i.e. Elizabeth Rather claiming to be a "leading expert" in Forth without having ever writing a Forth program, and being informed entirely about computer science by her COBOL background
3.) bull-shit --- deception; i.e. Anton Ertl claiming that it is ANS-Forth compliant for gForth to abort when FIND is applied to about half the words in the standard
Next time that you stick your nose where it doesn't belong, think about what is about to get dumped on your head!
> Standards groups are designed to define what is there not what users
> would like to see there.
For example, we have { that has been used for defining local variables since prior to ANS-Forth coming out in 1994, but which has now been renamed to {: in Forth-200x because SwiftForth uses { to define multi-line comments. Stephen Pelc cheerfully admits that he was at the meeting when this decision was made, and it came directly from Leon Wagner.
The implementation of { in my novice package (and, mostly likely, everybody else's implementation) zeros out the locals to the right of the |. By comparison, Anton Ertl's implementation of {: initializes these to whatever garbage value happened to be in memory already --- this is obviously a bug, but Anton insists that his implementation was done to spec. Anton doesn't say who gave him the spec (considering that he is the chairperson, I would have expected him to write the spec) --- obviously, it is Leon Wagner who gives Anton the specs for Forth-200x code --- Anton Ertl is really nothing more than Leon Wagner's code monkey.
> Groups like this debate idea's that sometimes
> get turn into implementations that may eventually become part of a standard.
Give an example of a good idea that got put in Forth-200x --- considering what an over-complicated bloated mess Forth-200x is, you have a huge abundance of examples to choose from --- but, I said a *good* example, which makes your task impossible.
> The way (only way) to change what is in a standard is to develop a tool
> set and with the user experience to back it up argue for its inclusion
> in a standard. In every standards group I have been part of there are
> always a lot of people who are critical of the standard. Standards can
> be changed but to do so you have to do serious amounts of homework and
> have working proof the idea is sound.
I have ALLOCATION in my novice package. My CLONE-NODE depends upon having ALLOCATION available. Everybody on the Forth-200x mailing list (including Anton Ertl) was in favor of this becoming standard until Leon Wagner announced that he wouldn't include it in SwiftForth --- at which time everybody began scrambling to claim that they had been opposed to it all along --- Leon Wagner killed this RfD without reading it (he said that it had nothing to do with linked-lists, despite the fact that this was the example I gave and I included code for cloning linked-lists, so it is obvious that he hadn't actually read the RfD when he killed it).
Meanwhile, Bernd Payson's "quotations" are a slam-dunk into Forth-200x because they require almost no effort to implement (they can be done in ANS-Forth, as they are just syntactic sugar for :NONAME that has always been in ANS-Forth) --- and never mind that they are totally useless because they don't provide the quotation with access to the parent function's local variables --- Bernd's quotations are no different from my "touchers" in the novice-package, but at least I'm honest and say that this is just a half-step toward lambda functions, and the best that could be done given ANS-Forth's limitations.
> It is a high bar and every case I have been involved in a standard that
> it hasn't been used that whole part of the industry regretted it.
What?
> If you
> are right in the changes you want to make and you want to make those
> changes part of a standard prove it with documented implementations and
> experience.
I wrote the ALLOCATION RfD (called SIZE originally) as an experiment --- this was a super obvious suggestion that should have been a slam-dunk --- the experiment was to see if any RfD at all could get accepted without Leon Wagner's approval.
All of this talk about me needing experience is baloney --- my MFX cross-compiler was way beyond anything that Forth Inc. or MPE have ever done, or ever will do (but, it was written in UR/Forth, so it fails the loyalty test).
> Developing a good standard takes a lot of work by a lot of
> people. My quick calculation is that each C release takes about 50 Man
> years plus the background work that each person does.
Developing a good standard takes a lot of work --- developing Forth-200x just requires agreeing with everything that Leon Wagner says --- even a low-grade moron like Alex McDonald can do this much work and succeed wonderfully.
Anton Ertl gets to be the chairperson of the Forth-200x committee doing this work --- Anton has to work harder though, swallowing his pride while foisting wild claims about how it makes sense for FIND to abort when applied to about half of the words in the standard --- spending the day spouting such bullshit must ruin his sleep at night, which is hard on a person's health.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-12 07:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mismrk$h4l$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #38993 |
On 11/05/2015 5:31 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 12:59:39 PM UTC-7, Walter Banks wrote: >> On 11/05/2015 3:37 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> Well, paste a tin-foil star on your little sycophant's >>> forehead --- he declared plainly that Forth-200x doesn't >>> represent the Forth users >> >> That is the part that you have been missing in this discussion. >> Standards represent what currently exists. They codify the existing >> practice. That is also why they get revised periodically. > > So, I'm the one who doesn't understand who a standards group represents? Yes...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 21:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mir3e9$1ud$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38987 |
on 11/05/2015 20:37:49, wrote: > On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 11:12:04 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather > > wrote: >> On 5/11/15 5:52 AM, Alex McDonald wrote: > > wrote: >> > 1. CLF is not the place for standards discussions & decisions, but it i > wrote: s >> > the place for discussions about standards, amongst other Forth things. >> > The standards discussions take place on the Forth200x Yahoo group. >> > https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/forth200x/info > > This isn't true. When I posted RfDs on that Forth-200x mailing list, I > was told that it had to first be discussed on C.L.F. before it could > be conside red by the Forth-200x committee. Bernd Payson warned me to > "wear a flame-pr oof suit" --- so I posted it on C.L.F. and got flamed > by the usual gang of idiots: John Passaniti, Alex McDonald, etc.. The > whole business is a joke - > -- nobody will ever get an RfD through the committee except by brown-nosing > --- nobody cares about the technical merits. > >> > 2. The Forth200x standards group doesn't represent Forth users or >> > companies that produce and use Forth products. The standards group >> > defines the language. > > So, who does the Forth-200x standards group represent? God? > Standards groups the world over do not represent the users or the companies that produce products that use the standard. The ANS Forth group did not represent Forth Inc. Forth200x isn't the public face of MPE. It's not representing the hundreds or thousands of Forth programmers. Standards groups don't represent anything. > When they define the language, do they get this definition from divine insp > iration, or do they just pull it out of their ass? > > I would really expect a language standards group to represent the language > users. The process is transparent and covered here; http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html. > >> > 3. Anyone can participate. I have had an RfD make it through to >> > standardization, although I am not on the standards committee, nor do I >> > post on (although I read) the Forth200x mailing list. I have influenced >> > the committee's decision making on a number of other RfDs as a >> > once-maintainer of Win32Forth and now the author of another Windows bas > ed >> > Forth. > > The ANS-Forth standard was gratuitously complicated. A lot of cruft, such a > s PAD was standardized. Also, a lot totally useless and stupid ideas such a > s TO were standardized. Forth-200x is more of the same --- we have N>R and > NR> for example, and now Bernd and Anton (aka "Dumb and Dumber") are introd > ucing a lot of weird and complex nonsense (SET-COMPILER COMP-SEM etc.) into > the standard as they struggle to understand the concept of Forth interpret > ation and compilation (which was actually figured out 40 years ago, and is > quite simple). Why did you bother with "disambiguifiers"? > > Jeff Fox told me that Charles Moore had described ANS-Forth as being 100 ti > mes more complicated than necessary. Shortly thereafter, the Forth-200x sta > ndards group began their work. Jeff Fox and Charles Moore assumed that the > name "Forth-200x" implied that it would be 200 times more complicated than > necessary, which would be the logical next step. Which is funny in a sort of smart ass Moore & Fox way. Hahahaha. Now what? Does it contribute anything other than a giggle or two? No. > > Sure: "anybody can participate." Leon Wagner allows yahoos like Alex McDona > ld to get their RfDs accepted so long as the RfD can be implemented with fi > ve minutes of work --- Leon does this to give the Forth-200x contributors t > he feeling that they have contributed, and project the appearance that Fort > h-200x is a community effort rather than just SwiftForth with pretensions - > -- the result however, is a lot of gratuitous complication with no discerni > ble plan or direction. > > The problem with "anybody can participate" is that you have people like Ale > x McDonald, with an I.Q. of maybe 85 --- getting his RfDs passed primarily > as a reward for brown-nosing --- meanwhile, somebody such as myself who kno > ws about Forth cross-compilers gets banned (I wrote my cross-compiler in UR > /Forth from Ray Duncan's Laboratory Microsystem Inc., not ANS-Forth from Fo > rth Inc.). > You were banned for being a disruptive asswipe with a serious personality disorder. [more crapping on doorstep cleaned up]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 14:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3035bbe6-d71b-4bdc-82de-d853897a4f45@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38989 |
On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 1:30:04 PM UTC-7, Alex McDonald wrote: > on 11/05/2015 20:37:49, wrote: > > The problem with "anybody can participate" is that you have people like Ale > > x McDonald, with an I.Q. of maybe 85 --- getting his RfDs passed primarily > > as a reward for brown-nosing --- meanwhile, somebody such as myself who kno > > ws about Forth cross-compilers gets banned (I wrote my cross-compiler in UR > > /Forth from Ray Duncan's Laboratory Microsystem Inc., not ANS-Forth from Fo > > rth Inc.). > You were banned for being a disruptive asswipe with a serious personality > disorder. I left the Forth-200x mailing list because Elizabeth Rather offended me. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/OSGAn7bsDU0 This is what she said that I found offensive: 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. I'm not going to be involved in the same standards team as somebody who says such a thing --- one of us had to be kicked out for gross incompetence --- Anton Ertl is the chairperson of the Forth-200x committee, so it was his decision which one of us would be kicked out. BTW: "ass-wipe" is normally a synonym for "brown-noser" --- is this really the best choice of insults for you to throw around? --- the term describes you, not me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 20:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <miri3e$l9r$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38994 |
On 5/11/2015 5:52 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > I left the Forth-200x mailing list because Elizabeth Rather offended me. What can we do to offend you here? -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-12 03:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mirlhg$uuc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #39000 |
rickman wrote: > On 5/11/2015 5:52 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >> >> I left the Forth-200x mailing list because Elizabeth Rather offended me. > > What can we do to offend you here? Haha, there's no hope, because that statement isn't true. The only one who was offending others was Hugh. Like all decisions of the Forth200x committee, it was a rough consensus decision to give Hugh what he had asked before. He told us that anybody with a spine would have kicked him out, and so we did. Fully knowing that he will produce a number of legends, victimizing himself. He's certainly only a victim of his personal disorder. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ* http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 22:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mirncj$qed$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #39002 |
On 5/11/2015 9:38 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote: > rickman wrote: > >> On 5/11/2015 5:52 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> I left the Forth-200x mailing list because Elizabeth Rather offended me. >> >> What can we do to offend you here? > > Haha, there's no hope, because that statement isn't true. The only one who > was offending others was Hugh. Like all decisions of the Forth200x > committee, it was a rough consensus decision to give Hugh what he had asked > before. He told us that anybody with a spine would have kicked him out, and > so we did. Fully knowing that he will produce a number of legends, > victimizing himself. > > He's certainly only a victim of his personal disorder. I don't like the idea of shunning someone, especially when they have the ability to help others see things in different ways as Hugh does. But he is just so disruptive. He also has very limited ability to see anything *other* than the way he sees it as amply demonstrated by his more recent conversations about the Forth standard and words without an XT. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 20:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4e0db89c-8714-4f8f-be94-a29c4dd86114@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #39004 |
On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 7:10:30 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote:
> I don't like the idea of shunning someone, especially when they have the
> ability to help others see things in different ways as Hugh does. But
> he is just so disruptive. He also has very limited ability to see
> anything *other* than the way he sees it as amply demonstrated by his
> more recent conversations about the Forth standard and words without an
> XT.
Forth words are supposed to have an xt that works ("execution-token" means EXECUTE works on it) --- for the ANS-Forth standard to allow FIND to abort (Gforth) or return a non-executable xt (VFX) when applied to 57 words in the standard, is blatant sabotage of the Forth language --- may the ANS-Forth committee burn in Hell for their unforgivable sabotage of the Forth language, which is something that I care about.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-12 01:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <155374af-2262-4dba-87a8-8a6330d29ad5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #39006 |
On Tuesday, 12 May 2015 04:25:54 UTC+1, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 7:10:30 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote:
> > I don't like the idea of shunning someone, especially when they have the
> > ability to help others see things in different ways as Hugh does. But
> > he is just so disruptive. He also has very limited ability to see
> > anything *other* than the way he sees it as amply demonstrated by his
> > more recent conversations about the Forth standard and words without an
> > XT.
>
> Forth words are supposed to have an xt that works ("execution-token" means EXECUTE works on it) --- for the ANS-Forth standard to allow FIND to abort (Gforth) or return a non-executable xt (VFX) when applied to 57 words in the standard, is blatant sabotage of the Forth language --- may the ANS-Forth committee burn in Hell for their unforgivable sabotage of the Forth language, which is something that I care about.
The standard says that ' <word> execute shall be equivalent to <word>
That is not the case with GForth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-12 11:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <misj3n$jqd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #39011 |
on 12/05/2015 09:13:06, Mark Wills wrote: > > The standard says that ' <word> execute shall be equivalent to <word> > > That is not the case with GForth. > You missed a bit. The standard says "When interpreting, ’ xyz EXECUTE is equivalent to xyz". When interpreting, this is the case with gforth. For instance ' S" EXECUTE ABCD" works.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-12 16:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mit1ek$cnd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #39012 |
Alex McDonald wrote: > on 12/05/2015 09:13:06, Mark Wills wrote: > >> >> The standard says that ' <word> execute shall be equivalent to <word> >> >> That is not the case with GForth. >> > > You missed a bit. The standard says "When interpreting, ' xyz EXECUTE is > equivalent to xyz". When interpreting, this is the case with gforth. For > instance ' S" EXECUTE ABCD" works. Well, the problematic point are compile-only words: ' if execute :1: error: Interpreting a compile-only word ' >>>if<<< execute Backtrace: $7F4AD828A598 throw $7F4AD828ABE0 execute $7F4AD828BA68 name?int if :2: error: Interpreting a compile-only word >>>if<<< Backtrace: $7F4AD828A598 throw Looks similar, but is not the same. ' IF already fails, the EXECUTE part is not even reached. You could interpret that statement of the standard that EXECUTE should do the actual action (here: throwing an error), in Gforth, it's ' which throws the error. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ* http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-12 14:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2015May12.160411@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #39004 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>I don't like the idea of shunning someone, especially when they have the
>ability to help others see things in different ways as Hugh does. But
>he is just so disruptive.
The issue was that the mailing list is for people who don't like the
Usenet way of "ignore or killfile people who don't behave"; so we
could not take the Usenet approach there.
- 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 2015: http://www.mpeforth.com/euroforth2015/euroforth2015.htm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 19:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <51fd6125-9791-4ea8-bb9b-a8261ffaca35@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #39000 |
On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 5:40:17 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote: > On 5/11/2015 5:52 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > > > I left the Forth-200x mailing list because Elizabeth Rather offended me. > > What can we do to offend you here? You can lie about me. This is what Elizabeth Rather said on the Forth-200x mailing list: Hugh has been hanging around c.l.f for several years, now. He originally got mad at FORTH, Inc. because we insisted on charging for an upgrade to SwiftForth 3.0 for people who had bought 2.x > a year earlier. He has had one programming job, paying $10/hr, on which he wrote a cross-compiler for a microcontroller for a project. He was fired at the end of the project, and has since been working as a taxicab driver. He is actively homophobic, and developed his hatred for me when I called him on a particularly vitriolic attack on a c.l.f poster who dared to mention his partner. Pretty much everyone on c.l.f has his number. Hope you are doing well. Ned and i are enjoying life in Hawaii, and hope you are, too! Aloha, Elizabeth I said this: Elizabeth says: [Hugh] has had one programming job, paying $10/hr, on which he wrote a cross-compiler for a microcontroller for a project. He was fired at the end of the project, and has since been working as a taxicab driver. You're lying. For one thing, I have worked at several programming jobs. You know this, because I have mentioned the C/C++ and the IBM370 assembly-language jobs on comp.lang.forth. Also, I wasn't fired from Testra after writing MFX (the cross-compiler for the MIniForth). I did another large project for them later on. After that I quit because I wasn't getting a raise and because I wasn't getting health benefits even though the other employee was --- basically, because it was a dead-end job. I've worked as a machinist since then --- cab-driving is just something that I do when I'm unemployed --- right now I working in construction. How would you know anything about Testra business decisions? They don't like you either, and aren't talking to you. One time I asked John Hart why he was using UR/Forth rather than SwiftForth, and he said that he can't stand you personally, but he got along with Ray Duncan okay. I didn't know you at the time. This was fine with me though, as I had disassembled the heck out of UR/Forth on my own time prior to getting hired, and so I already had a leg up on the job. After I left Testra I bought a copy of SwiftForth on my own, and I found that it was slow, buggy and generally no good (I've seen shareware Forths that were better) --- I wouldn't have been able to write MFX using SwiftForth, although I had succeeded with UR/Forth. When I worked at Testra I was told that you had previously given them a sales pitch for Forth Inc. to write the cross-compiler. You wanted an "exorbitant" amount of money though, and you obviously didn't know anything about the subject on a technical level, which is why I got hired instead. I think that you hate me because I stole the job from you. There are only a tiny handful of companies in the world who are building a Forth-engine and are willing to pay for its development (because it is going to be used in a commercial product, rather than just be a hobbyist toy). You felt that Forth Inc. deserved the job, and that I stole it from you. Elizabeth says: [Hugh] is actively homophobic, and developed his hatred for me when I called him on a particularly vitriolic attack on a c.l.f poster who dared to mention his partner. Here is the comp.lang.forth thread that she is referring to in which she put me on her kill list in support of Passaniti: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/w3tHPsTaZvE
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-11 22:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mirpgn$7s9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #39003 |
On 5/11/2015 10:08 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 5:40:17 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote: >> On 5/11/2015 5:52 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> I left the Forth-200x mailing list because Elizabeth Rather offended me. >> >> What can we do to offend you here? > > You can lie about me. If I lie about you will you go away? Hugh is an easy going guy and always happy to discuss anything in a calm and rational way, especially when he can understand someone else's point of view. There, how's that for a big lie? -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-14 18:30 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <mj1mf4$kv$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #38972 |
rickman wrote: > On 5/10/2015 10:10 PM, HAA wrote: > > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> On 5/9/15 4:57 PM, HAA wrote: > >> ... > >>> Yet it is these same 'clf' folk whom you permit (rely on) to define Forth via > >>> the Standard. > >> > >> A significant number of the voting members (according to the published > >> Forth 2012) are rarely if ever on c.l.f., > > > > They must be MIA. 'cfv' results suggest what response there has been > > has come mostly from c.l.f. > > > > http://www.forth200x.org/ > > > >> and a number of c.l.f regulars > >> aren't on the Standards team (including myself). > > > > You are the notable exception. Don't believe 200x represents what > > Forth is about? > > That is a scary thought! 8-O But hardly a surprise. She's been publicly invited on more than one occasion on c.l.f. to join 200x but has declined. Add to that comments such as "Adapting features from other languages "just because they can"". None of this sounds like support for 200x. Avoiding the question has only made the case stronger.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-13 22:55 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <B9KdnTImaK9z_8nInZ2dnUU7-bWdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #39100 |
On 5/13/15 10:30 PM, HAA wrote: > rickman wrote: >> On 5/10/2015 10:10 PM, HAA wrote: >>> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >>>> On 5/9/15 4:57 PM, HAA wrote: >>>> ... >>>>> Yet it is these same 'clf' folk whom you permit (rely on) to define Forth via >>>>> the Standard. >>>> >>>> A significant number of the voting members (according to the published >>>> Forth 2012) are rarely if ever on c.l.f., >>> >>> They must be MIA. 'cfv' results suggest what response there has been >>> has come mostly from c.l.f. >>> >>> http://www.forth200x.org/ >>> >>>> and a number of c.l.f regulars >>>> aren't on the Standards team (including myself). >>> >>> You are the notable exception. Don't believe 200x represents what >>> Forth is about? >> >> That is a scary thought! 8-O > > But hardly a surprise. She's been publicly invited on more than one > occasion on c.l.f. to join 200x but has declined. Add to that comments > such as "Adapting features from other languages "just because they can"". > None of this sounds like support for 200x. Avoiding the question has > only made the case stronger. I'm not boycotting Forth 200x because of any sense of disapproval. I turned FORTH, Inc. over to Leon Wagner when I retired, and he is representing the company on the 200x team. He is an outstanding Forth programmer, and I'm sure he's doing a fine job on the committee. 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 | "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-16 05:08 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <mj5g68$3uu$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #39101 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 5/13/15 10:30 PM, HAA wrote: > > rickman wrote: > >> On 5/10/2015 10:10 PM, HAA wrote: > >>> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >>>> On 5/9/15 4:57 PM, HAA wrote: > >>>> ... > >>>>> Yet it is these same 'clf' folk whom you permit (rely on) to define Forth via > >>>>> the Standard. > >>>> > >>>> A significant number of the voting members (according to the published > >>>> Forth 2012) are rarely if ever on c.l.f., > >>> > >>> They must be MIA. 'cfv' results suggest what response there has been > >>> has come mostly from c.l.f. > >>> > >>> http://www.forth200x.org/ > >>> > >>>> and a number of c.l.f regulars > >>>> aren't on the Standards team (including myself). > >>> > >>> You are the notable exception. Don't believe 200x represents what > >>> Forth is about? > >> > >> That is a scary thought! 8-O > > > > But hardly a surprise. She's been publicly invited on more than one > > occasion on c.l.f. to join 200x but has declined. Add to that comments > > such as "Adapting features from other languages "just because they can"". > > None of this sounds like support for 200x. Avoiding the question has > > only made the case stronger. > > I'm not boycotting Forth 200x because of any sense of disapproval. I > turned FORTH, Inc. over to Leon Wagner when I retired, and he is > representing the company on the 200x team. He is an outstanding Forth > programmer, and I'm sure he's doing a fine job on the committee. My mistake. I had the distinct impression you didn't agree with a number of decisions 200x made, such as the one on locals which undermined Forth-94.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-15 09:54 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <JPCdncUZ6tZ208vInZ2dnUU7-f-dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #39153 |
On 5/15/15 9:08 AM, HAA wrote: > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 5/13/15 10:30 PM, HAA wrote: >>> rickman wrote: >>>> On 5/10/2015 10:10 PM, HAA wrote: >>>>> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >>>>>> On 5/9/15 4:57 PM, HAA wrote: >>>>>> ... >>>>>>> Yet it is these same 'clf' folk whom you permit (rely on) to define Forth via >>>>>>> the Standard. >>>>>> >>>>>> A significant number of the voting members (according to the published >>>>>> Forth 2012) are rarely if ever on c.l.f., >>>>> >>>>> They must be MIA. 'cfv' results suggest what response there has been >>>>> has come mostly from c.l.f. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.forth200x.org/ >>>>> >>>>>> and a number of c.l.f regulars >>>>>> aren't on the Standards team (including myself). >>>>> >>>>> You are the notable exception. Don't believe 200x represents what >>>>> Forth is about? >>>> >>>> That is a scary thought! 8-O >>> >>> But hardly a surprise. She's been publicly invited on more than one >>> occasion on c.l.f. to join 200x but has declined. Add to that comments >>> such as "Adapting features from other languages "just because they can"". >>> None of this sounds like support for 200x. Avoiding the question has >>> only made the case stronger. >> >> I'm not boycotting Forth 200x because of any sense of disapproval. I >> turned FORTH, Inc. over to Leon Wagner when I retired, and he is >> representing the company on the 200x team. He is an outstanding Forth >> programmer, and I'm sure he's doing a fine job on the committee. > > My mistake. I had the distinct impression you didn't agree with a number > of decisions 200x made, such as the one on locals which undermined > Forth-94. I disagreed with a number of decisions in Forth94, but that body, like Forth200x, worked according to reasonable rules, and I support the resulting Standard(s). I seriously doubt whether there is *anyone* on a standards body that agrees with *all* the decisions it makes! 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 | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-20 13:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7b5a1d71-5598-4236-ac6d-d2a07742a508@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #39156 |
On the Forth Inc. website, http://www.forth.com/resources/evolution/index.html Elizabeth Rather describes herself this way: "Elizabeth Rather is the co-founder of FORTH, Inc. and is a leading expert in the Forth programming language. Elizabeth was a colleague of Chuck Moore back when he worked at NRAO in the early 1970s. During his development of Forth, she became the second ever Forth programmer. Since then, she has become a leading expert in the language and one of its main proponents. Elizabeth was the chair of the ANSI Technical Committee that produced the ANSI Standard for Forth (1994). She is an author of several books on Forth and gives regular training seminars on its usage." Now Elizabeth Rather says this: On Friday, May 15, 2015 at 12:54:21 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > I disagreed with a number of decisions in Forth94, but that body, like > Forth200x, worked according to reasonable rules, and I support the > resulting Standard(s). I seriously doubt whether there is *anyone* on a > standards body that agrees with *all* the decisions it makes! It has become obvious that ANS-Forth was a total failure, so now Elizabeth Rather dodges responsibility for this failure and blames everybody else on the ANS-Forth committee. I think that Stephen Pelc, Bernd Payson and Anton Ertl need to come to grips with the fact that they are stooges. They currently believe that if they are totally loyal to Elizabeth Rather, their loyalty will be rewarded. This isn't going to happen however --- Elizabeth Rather only allows them to be on the Forth-200x committee so that, after Forth-200x fails, she has somebody to blame --- meanwhile, she demands that they totally obey her with all the loyalty and devotion of beagles.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web