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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #42204 > unrolled thread

New to the group

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

Contents

  New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 15:17 -0700
    Re: New to the group mentificium@gmail.com - 2015-09-26 17:35 -0700
    Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-26 21:16 -0700
      Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 07:27 -0700
        Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 14:43 -0400
          Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 13:05 -0700
          Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-27 12:57 -1000
          Re: New to the group Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-27 17:00 -0700
            Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-27 17:16 -0700
              Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 20:31 -0400
              Re: New to the group jfong@ms4.hinet.net - 2015-09-27 18:57 -0700
                Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-27 19:37 -0700
                  Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 20:53 -0700
                    Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-27 19:02 -1000
                      Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-27 23:33 -0700
                        Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 04:51 -0700
                          Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 12:39 -0400
                    Re: New to the group Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-09-28 14:29 +0200
                      Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 07:18 -0700
                        Re: New to the group foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2015-09-28 08:07 -0700
                        Re: New to the group Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-09-28 17:23 +0200
                          Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 11:16 -0700
                            Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 14:25 -0400
                              Re: New to the group anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-09-29 09:05 +0000
                            Re: New to the group Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-09-28 20:31 +0200
                              Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:20 -0700
                                Re: New to the group Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2015-09-28 22:52 +0200
                                  Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 16:40 -0700
                        Re: New to the group Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 08:41 -0700
                        Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-28 11:41 -1000
                          Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-28 21:33 -0700
                      Re: New to the group jfong@ms4.hinet.net - 2015-09-28 19:13 -0700
                        Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 00:51 -0400
                          Re: New to the group jfong@ms4.hinet.net - 2015-09-29 18:26 -0700
                            Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 21:55 -0400
                            Re: New to the group Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-09-30 08:29 +0100
                          Re: New to the group jfong@ms4.hinet.net - 2015-09-29 18:52 -0700
                      Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-29 00:29 -0700
                        Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 04:40 -0700
                          Re: New to the group Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 05:24 -0700
                          Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 07:33 -0700
                            Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-29 14:11 -0700
                      Re: New to the group "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 16:46 +0000
                        Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-29 14:15 -0700
                          Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 17:34 -0400
                      Re: New to the group "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-30 00:07 +0000
      Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 10:54 -0700
    Re: New to the group Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-26 22:37 -0700
      Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 10:51 -0700
    Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 17:15 -0700
      Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 21:58 -0400
        Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 22:03 -0700
          Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-29 21:32 -1000
            Re: New to the group Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-09-30 09:06 +0100
              Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-30 08:58 -1000
                Re: New to the group Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 23:55 -0700
                  Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-30 21:28 -1000
                  Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 08:25 -0400
                  Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-10-01 09:33 -0700
              Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-30 16:21 -0700
                Re: New to the group "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-30 21:03 -0400
                  Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-09-30 19:34 -1000
                    Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-30 23:47 -0700
                      Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 08:31 -0400
                        Re: New to the group "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-10-02 00:30 -0400
                          Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-01 19:22 -1000
                            Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-10-01 23:52 -0700
                          Re: New to the group Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 01:52 -0700
                            Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-02 08:36 -1000
                            Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 17:00 -0400
                              Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 14:46 -0700
                                Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 18:10 -0400
                                Re: New to the group Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-02 16:08 -0700
                                  Re: New to the group "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-10-02 20:44 -0400
                                    Re: New to the group David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-10-31 06:54 -0400
                                      Re: New to the group "Rod Pemberton" <too@zxcvfeqad.cdm> - 2015-11-02 02:34 -0500
                                        Re: New to the group David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-12-22 06:45 -0500
                                      Re: New to the group "Rod Pemberton" <too@zxcvfeqad.cdm> - 2015-11-02 02:34 -0500
                                  Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-02 15:16 -1000
                                    Re: New to the group Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-02 18:21 -0700
                                      Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-02 15:38 -1000
                                    Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 22:13 -0400
                                      Re: New to the group Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-10-03 22:24 +0100
                                        Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 17:33 -0400
            Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-30 17:00 -0700
              Re: New to the group "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-30 20:38 -0400
              Re: New to the group Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-02 14:37 -0400
                Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 17:01 -0400
                Re: New to the group hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-10-02 23:35 -0700
          Re: New to the group "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-09-30 18:11 -0400
            Re: New to the group Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-10-01 02:13 +0200
      Re: New to the group Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-09-30 08:38 +0100
        Re: New to the group Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-09-30 10:58 -0400
    Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 06:04 -0700
      Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 09:46 -0400
      Re: New to the group anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-08 06:07 +0000
        Re: New to the group Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 04:04 -0700
          Re: New to the group rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 10:29 -0400
          Re: New to the group anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-09 15:30 +0000
    Re: New to the group lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 00:19 -0700
      Re: New to the group visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-10-03 17:01 -0700
      Re: New to the group anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-08 06:38 +0000
        Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-07 21:15 -1000
          Minimal wordset (was: New to the group) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-08 13:39 +0000
            Re: Minimal wordset (was: New to the group) JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2015-10-08 08:13 -0700
              Re: Minimal wordset (was: New to the group) Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 00:55 -0700
                Re: Minimal wordset Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-10-09 10:43 +0200
                  Re: Minimal wordset Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 06:56 -0700
                    Re: Minimal wordset Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-10-09 19:44 +0200
                      Re: Minimal wordset Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-09 14:02 -0700
                        Re: Minimal wordset Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-10-10 09:44 +0100
                        Re: Minimal wordset anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-10 11:36 +0000
                  Re: Minimal wordset lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 08:40 -0700
                    Re: Minimal wordset Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-10-09 19:53 +0200
                      Re: Minimal wordset lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 11:22 -0700
                        Re: Minimal wordset JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2015-10-09 11:33 -0700
                        Re: Minimal wordset Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-10-09 20:38 +0200
                        Re: Minimal wordset stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-10-09 20:56 +0000
                          Re: Minimal wordset rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 20:10 -0500
                            Re: Minimal wordset Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-11-02 03:05 +0100
                            Re: Minimal wordset "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-01 16:08 -1000
                            Re: Minimal wordset stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-11-02 09:35 +0000
                              Re: Minimal wordset anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-11-02 12:42 +0000
                                Re: Minimal wordset humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 23:22 -0800
                              Re: Minimal wordset rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 11:25 -0500
                                Re: Minimal wordset stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-11-03 19:36 +0000
                              Re: Minimal wordset "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-11-08 12:56 +1100
                                Re: Minimal wordset stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-11-08 16:14 +0000
                                  Re: Minimal wordset "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-11-09 11:55 +1100
                            Re: Minimal wordset anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-11-02 09:41 +0000
                              Re: Minimal wordset rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 11:29 -0500
                                Re: Minimal wordset anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-11-03 17:01 +0000
                  Re: Minimal wordset JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2015-10-09 11:27 -0700
              Re: Minimal wordset (was: New to the group) "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-10-09 23:11 -0400
                Re: Minimal wordset (was: New to the group) Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-10-10 08:38 +0100
        Re: New to the group dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-10-14 23:14 +0000
          Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-14 16:21 -1000
          Re: New to the group anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-15 08:46 +0000
    Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 09:23 -0700
      Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-03 09:19 -1000
    Re: New to the group lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 05:24 -0700
      Re: New to the group "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-08 08:22 -1000
        Re: New to the group lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 08:37 -0700
    Re: New to the group Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 10:44 -0700

Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

#42232

On 28/09/15 16:18, Chris Curl wrote:
> OK then.

> I am building my own little interactive macro assembler that is similar to Forth in spirit and behavior.

Call it Forth if you think it's Forth. Hardly anyone anno 2015 will 
dispute that, this is not preANS times.

> As I am not interested in familiarizing myself the standard,

and why should you

> or making it play nicely with offerings from others,

again why should you

it is very unlikely that this little tool I am building for myself will 
be ANS Forth compliant.

Great to hear from one _using_ his/her tool.

> Given that reality, is this group a good place for me?

I don't know.

> Or am I too far out on the fringes for you folks?

Certainly not for me or many others IMHO, like I said there are a 
gazillion number of different implementations (again ANS killed 
nothing), ANS compliant or not. Amazing some of them. Personally I think 
that's Forth strength. I love the diversity! Doesn't mean I'm interested 
in using all of them or liking them, but that's irrelevant for their 
existence.

I'm not criticizing what you do. It's going along with a profound lie 
about ANS on which you reacted with:
" Here we had a truly unique thing that could morph into anything, and 
change the trajectory of programming. And they killed it because they 
wanted to control it. What a shame."

Look at the often selectively overlooked "E.6 Summary" from the ANS 
document. FYI a very crude interpretation/summary: do what ever you feel 
you should do. If you want portability, we're there to help you.

How in heavens sake could Forth be killed by that?

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

#42235

On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 11:23:43 AM UTC-4, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
> Look at the often selectively overlooked "E.6 Summary" from the ANS 
> document. FYI a very crude interpretation/summary: do what ever you feel 
> you should do. If you want portability, we're there to help you.
> 
> How in heavens sake could Forth be killed by that?

I hear you ... I think might have gotten a little carried away by an earlier post.

Now on to the fun stuff ... :)

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

#42236

On 9/28/2015 2:16 PM, Chris Curl wrote:
> On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 11:23:43 AM UTC-4, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
>> Look at the often selectively overlooked "E.6 Summary" from the ANS
>> document. FYI a very crude interpretation/summary: do what ever you feel
>> you should do. If you want portability, we're there to help you.
>>
>> How in heavens sake could Forth be killed by that?
>
> I hear you ... I think might have gotten a little carried away by an earlier post.
>
> Now on to the fun stuff ... :)

Just to add my 2 cents worth, ANS also allows for exceptions to the 
standard as long as those exceptions are documented.  This might not 
apply to every aspect of the system, but there is lots of wiggle room.

-- 

Rick

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

#42250

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>Just to add my 2 cents worth, ANS also allows for exceptions to the 
>standard as long as those exceptions are documented.  This might not 
>apply to every aspect of the system, but there is lots of wiggle room.

And there are complaints about that, just as there are complaints
about it being too restrictive and not allowing, say, changing the
values of constants.  I think there have been cases where the same guy
complained about the standard being too lax and too restrictive.

- 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.rigwit.co.uk/EuroForth2015/

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

#42237

On 28/09/15 20:16, Chris Curl wrote:
> On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 11:23:43 AM UTC-4, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
>> Look at the often selectively overlooked "E.6 Summary" from the ANS
>> document. FYI a very crude interpretation/summary: do what ever you feel
>> you should do. If you want portability, we're there to help you.
>>
>> How in heavens sake could Forth be killed by that?
>
> I hear you ... I think might have gotten a little carried away by an earlier post.
>
> Now on to the fun stuff ... :)
>

Yes by all means!

May I say how great it is to see the documentation in your C++ source 
code. Excellent, really, a first for me. A good example to follow.

Cheers, -r

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

#42239

On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 2:32:07 PM UTC-4, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
> 
> Yes by all means!
> 
> May I say how great it is to see the documentation in your C++ source 
> code. Excellent, really, a first for me. A good example to follow.
> 
> Cheers, -r
Documentation in my C++? You're a funny guy! 

Seriously though .. maybe I've been doing this too long, but to me, my code is "intuitively obvious upon casual inspection", so it doesn't need to be explained with additional comments. I do put in notes about stuff that is likely to be not obvious 6 months from now.

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

#42240

On 28/09/15 22:20, Chris Curl wrote:
> On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 2:32:07 PM UTC-4, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
>>
>> Yes by all means!
>>
>> May I say how great it is to see the documentation in your C++ source
>> code. Excellent, really, a first for me. A good example to follow.
>>
>> Cheers, -r
> Documentation in my C++? You're a funny guy!
>
> Seriously though .. maybe I've been doing this too long, but to me, my code is "intuitively obvious upon casual inspection",

>so it doesn't need to be explained with additional comments. I do put in notes about stuff that is likely to be not obvious 6 months from now.
>

Sorry, I meant those notes. Together with your "intuitively obvious upon 
casual inspection" makes it easier for a non native C++ speaker to 
follow. Had to wrestle thru C++ code recently.  The code was the only 
documentation on the subject. Only non code text was the copyright 
stuff. Gave me a splitting headache trying to follow the sprawling all 
over the place code. Hence I was pleasant surprised to see your code.
I like that style ;-)

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

#42245

On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 4:53:07 PM UTC-4, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
> On 28/09/15 22:20, Chris Curl wrote:
> > On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 2:32:07 PM UTC-4, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes by all means!
> >>
> >> May I say how great it is to see the documentation in your C++ source
> >> code. Excellent, really, a first for me. A good example to follow.
> >>
> >> Cheers, -r
> > Documentation in my C++? You're a funny guy!
> >
> > Seriously though .. maybe I've been doing this too long, but to me, my code is "intuitively obvious upon casual inspection",
> 
> >so it doesn't need to be explained with additional comments. I do put in notes about stuff that is likely to be not obvious 6 months from now.
> >
> 
> Sorry, I meant those notes. Together with your "intuitively obvious upon 
> casual inspection" makes it easier for a non native C++ speaker to 
> follow. Had to wrestle thru C++ code recently.  The code was the only 
> documentation on the subject. Only non code text was the copyright 
> stuff. Gave me a splitting headache trying to follow the sprawling all 
> over the place code. Hence I was pleasant surprised to see your code.
> I like that style ;-)

Thanks!

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

#42233

On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 10:18:43 AM UTC-4, Chris Curl wrote:
> OK then.
> 
> I am building my own little interactive macro assembler that is similar to Forth in spirit and behavior. As I am not interested in familiarizing myself the standard, or making it play nicely with offerings from others, it is very unlikely that this little tool I am building for myself will be ANS Forth compliant.
> 
> Given that reality, is this group a good place for me? Or am I too far out on the fringes for you folks?

It sounds as if your spirit is similar to mine in this regard. I too have my own version of Forth, bootstrapped from assembly language. It is definitely not compliant with ANS Forth, I don't intend for it to be used by anyone but me, and at this point it's generally just to satisfy my own intellectual curiosity.

That said, I think it may be useful for further study. For example, it might come in handy for creating other languages. I've always wanted to give that a try.

As for this group: I'm brand-new to it too, so I don't have a lot to say about it in general. I can say that I find it interesting and provocative. Don't worry too much about the folks who seem to use it as a platform to pose on. :)

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

#42242

On 9/28/15 4:18 AM, Chris Curl wrote:
> OK then.
>
> I am building my own little interactive macro assembler that is similar to Forth in spirit and behavior. As I am not interested in familiarizing myself the standard, or making it play nicely with offerings from others, it is very unlikely that this little tool I am building for myself will be ANS Forth compliant.
>
> Given that reality, is this group a good place for me? Or am I too far out on the fringes for you folks?
>

Compliance to a standard may not be relevant for your purposes, but you 
can still learn a lot by spending a little time using a well-documented 
existing Forth before diving in to your project. There are free 
evaluation systems available from both FORTH, Inc. and MPE (the major 
commercial system suppliers), as well as gForth.

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]

#42247

This is what the standard says (section 3.2.3.2 again):

"The control-flow stack may, but need not, physically exist in an implementation. If it does exist, it may be, but need not be, implemented using the data stack. The format of the control-flow stack is implementation defined. Since the control-flow stack may be implemented using the data stack, items placed on the data stack are unavailable to a program after items are placed on the control-flow stack and remain unavailable until the control-flow stack items are removed."

This is what Elizabeth Rather says:

On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 2:41:38 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> ...you 
> can still learn a lot by spending a little time using a well-documented 
> existing Forth

I find it remarkable that sales-people can deliver such preposterous lines seriously, as if they expect people to believe them --- I also find it remarkable that they always find people to believe them --- this is a sad commentary on human intelligence.

The ANS-Forth document is full of ambiguity. All of these ambiguous statements are the result of political concessions. That section 3.2.3.2 above tells me that some people contributing to ANS-Forth knew that the control-flow stack should be separate from the data-stack and they refused to lend their names to the ANS-Forth document if their Forth systems were made non-standard. So E.R. said something to the effect of: "Okay, fine, that is standard." But Forth Inc. has the control-flow stack the same as the data-stack, so that had to be standard too. But this is contradictory! Any code written to assume that the control-flow stack is separate from the data-stack will crash and burn when compiled on a system (SwiftForth) that has the control-flow stack the same as the data-stack. Similarly, we have section 6.1.1550 (the entry for FIND) that says:

"For a given string, the values returned by FIND while compiling may differ from those returned while not compiling."

This was a concession to allow cmForth to be ANS-Forth compliant. Most likely, the FIND in cmForth provided a different value inside of colon words rather than outside, because the search-order (the CONTEXT vocabulary) was different.  This doesn't require an exception in the ANS-Forth document as shown above, because search-order is already documented elsewhere. Also, most likely, Charles Moore (author of cmForth) had not requested that cmForth be made ANS-Forth standard, as he has never shown any interest in ANS-Forth. Now we have this bizarre statement in the ANS-Forth document. Anton Ertl takes advantage of this to make FIND in gForth provide different values depending upon what STATE is at the time that FIND executes, providing a WTF??? moment for every Forth programmer in the world --- this is totally incompatible with every other ANS-Forth compliant Forth.

All of these ANS-Forth compliant Forth systems are incompatible with each other in myriad ways, because they interpret these ambiguous conditions differently, but they are all ANS-Forth compliant anyway. So, what what did the ANS-Forth standard accomplish, as compared to the situation if we didn't have any standard and everybody just did what they felt like doing? 

Ultimately, being ANS-Forth compliant depends entirely upon Elizabeth Rather saying that you are ANS-Forth compliant, and it has nothing to do with compliance in the technical sense. If Chris Curl wants his home-brew Forth system to be ANS-Forth compliant, all he has to do is make big speeches on comp.lang.forth saying that Elizabeth Rather is the "leading expert" on Forth, and she will grant him ANS-Forth compliance quid-pro-bro --- he doesn't have to actually read the ANS-Forth document to be ANS-Forth compliant --- I recommend that he not read the ANS-Forth document because it will just turn his brain into mush (I know it has that effect on me, and I've been programming in Forth since 1984, so I can only imagine what it would do to somebody new to Forth). Intellectual curiosity is a good thing, but it is also true that curiosity killed the cat --- you have to be careful not taste any poison spewed by an idiot sales-person as it may turn your brain into mush.

All in all, ANS-Forth is a purely negative contribution to Forth programming --- I don't recommend ANS-Forth for anybody, neither novice nor expert.

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

#42246

Roelf Toxopeus 2015/9/28 8:29:48 wrote：
> Hugh Aguilar, I'm amazed, he's sure lucky no one dragged him in court 
> for slander (yet)! Pretty obnoxious this guy!

No one? Why? Why others have to do it for you?

It's sad that this world is full of people who always "hope" someone(maybe God?) will do something for them. They are physiological crippled people. Take a look at Bernd Paysan's motto: "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself", it might cure you.

--Jach

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

#42248

On 9/28/2015 10:13 PM, jfong@ms4.hinet.net wrote:
> Roelf Toxopeus 2015/9/28 8:29:48 wrote：
>> Hugh Aguilar, I'm amazed, he's sure lucky no one dragged him in court
>> for slander (yet)! Pretty obnoxious this guy!
>
> No one? Why? Why others have to do it for you?
>
> It's sad that this world is full of people who always "hope" someone(maybe God?) will do something for them. They are physiological crippled people. Take a look at Bernd Paysan's motto: "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself", it might cure you.

I think you misunderstood what Roelf was saying.  I will chalk it up to 
the language barrier.

-- 

Rick

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

#42261

rickman 2015/09/29 12:51:22PM wrote：
> I think you misunderstood what Roelf was saying.  I will chalk it up to 
> the language barrier.

No, the language barrier is not that big to make me misunderstand.

On 28/09/15 05:53, Chris Curl wrote:
> This is a damned lie and by repeating it ad infinite, it still won't
> become the truth!

You can't accuse someone of lying just bacause you don't agree with his opinion.
You can only accuse someone of lying by providing facts as the evidence, not by your opinion.

> I've got this scalding hot cup of coffee here, would love to throw it ...

This is a totally low-EQ reaction.

--Jach

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

#42264

On 9/29/2015 9:26 PM, jfong@ms4.hinet.net wrote:
> rickman 2015/09/29 12:51:22PM wrote：
>> I think you misunderstood what Roelf was saying.  I will chalk it up to
>> the language barrier.
>
> No, the language barrier is not that big to make me misunderstand.
>
> On 28/09/15 05:53, Chris Curl wrote:
>> This is a damned lie and by repeating it ad infinite, it still won't
>> become the truth!
>
> You can't accuse someone of lying just bacause you don't agree with his opinion.
> You can only accuse someone of lying by providing facts as the evidence, not by your opinion.
>
>> I've got this scalding hot cup of coffee here, would love to throw it ...
>
> This is a totally low-EQ reaction.

And none of that has anything to do with your post I replied to which 
you snipped.

The group is full of those who enjoy drama more than the technical 
discussions.  I'm not one so I'm not going to continue this discussion.

-- 

Rick

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

#42267

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 18:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
jfong@ms4.hinet.net wrote:

> rickman 2015/09/29 12:51:22PM wrote：
> > I think you misunderstood what Roelf was saying.  I will
> > chalk it up to the language barrier.
> 
> No, the language barrier is not that big to make me
> misunderstand.
> 
> On 28/09/15 05:53, Chris Curl wrote:
> > This is a damned lie and by repeating it ad infinite, it
> > still won't become the truth!

Misleading quote, Roelf wrote that. The problem is bigger than
a language barrier.  Chris might be a bit upset as well. 

However, I tend to agree with Roelf. My forth cannot comply with
the standard, but I still appreciate that most of the functions
in any forth can have an agreed name. 

I don't think that standardisation has in any way been
detrimental to forth, as hughag...@gmail repeatedly claims.

Even if the standard had as many ambiguous or difficult name
choices as Chuck uses, I would still not accuse the standard
maintainers of dumping excrement on my head. 

Allowing for a little difference in language I agree with
Roelf's stated posiion, but probably would want to avoid wasting
my coffee over it in either way. 

Jan Coombs. 
-- 
email valid, else fix dots and hyphen
jan4clf2014@murrayhyphenmicroftdotcodotuk

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

#42263

rickman 2015/09/29  12:51:22PM wrote：
> I think you misunderstood what Roelf was saying.  I will chalk it up to 
> the language barrier.

No, the language barrier is not that big to make me misunderstand.

This is what he said:
On 28/09/28, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
> This is a damned lie and by repeating it ad infinite, it still won't
> become the truth!

You can't accuse someone of lying just because you don't agree with his opinion.
You can only accuse someone of lying by providing facts as the evidence, not by your opinion.

and here:
> I've got this scalding hot cup of coffee here, would love to throw it ...

This is a totally low-EQ reaction.

--Jach

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

#42249

On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 5:29:48 AM UTC-7, Roelf Toxopeus wrote:
> In utter anger and armed to the teeth, -r

I think that what mostly ruins standards is that the people involved get to be too full of themselves. They feel powerful because everything they do is Standard (with a capital 'S') and everybody must bow before them else be damned to non-standard hell.

The result is a lot of pseudo-intellectual nonsense. For example, consider this thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/AcqnHxflT58%5B226-250%5D
Here we had this:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 3:59:09 AM UTC-7, Roelf Toxopeus wrote: 
> On Jef Raskin's request I wrote PIXPUTTER in OF. Tell me if this is not 
> Forth. 
> 
> <code> 
> decimal 
> 
> 0 value myscreen 
> " screen" open-dev to myscreen 
> 
> create saved-color 0 , 
> 
> \ using color# 0 in table for our colored pixel 
> : save-color ( -- ) 
>    saved-color 0 1  s" get-colors" myscreen $call-method ; 
> 
> : restore-color ( -- ) 
>    saved-color 0 1  s" set-colors" myscreen $call-method ; 
> 
> : !color ( r g b -- )  0 s" color!" myscreen $call-method ; 
> 
> : pixel ( x y -- addr )  screen-width * + frame-buffer-adr + ; 
> 
> : (pixputter) ( x y r g b -- )  !color pixel 0 swap c! ; 
> 
> : PIXPUTTER ( x y r g b -- )  save-color (pixputter) restore-color ; 
> </code> 

Here we have the gratuitous use of OOP (common during the 1990s, not just in Open Forth). The $CALL-METHOD function is passed a string which is the name of a function. $CALL-METHOD has to look this string up in some kind of data-structure (most likely the dictionary itself, which is typically either a hash-table or a linked-list). It is doing this dictionary-lookup at run-time though! This is grossly inefficient! Especially mind-blowing about this code, is that there is only one instance of the SCREEN class, stored in the MYSCREEN global variable --- this is because there is only one physical screen attached to the computer --- all of this grossly inefficient OOP nonsense is totally pointless from a technical perspective.

So, what was the point of the OOP? Mostly, the point of the OOP is so the programmers can present themselves as being big computer-scientists. I can imagine myself going to a job interview in 1995 for an Open Forth job (in an alternate reality in which Open Forth didn't catastrophically fail in 1995). I would say: "I wrote MFX the development system for the MiniForth. The MiniForth was used in laser-etchers; it was both faster and less expensive than the MC68000 that the competition was using." Then Roelf Toxopeus the interviewer would say: "Did you use OOP?" I say: "Nope." Roelf then tells me that I'm not qualified to program in Open Forth, and out the door I go, and eventually Roelf hires somebody who is just as incompetent as he is and hence does not threaten Roelf's lofty position as big OOP priest. The point of OOP is that it is a club to beat people over the head with --- like any weapon, it is an "equalizer" --- the incompetent programmer armed with OOP can beat up the competent programmer (just as a weakling armed with a bat can beat up a strong man who is unarmed, especially if he catches him by surprise).

My reaction to Reolf's OOP usage in Open Forth reminds me of that Police song with these lyrics:
"Their eloquence escapes me, 
Their logic ties me up and rapes me"

I feel the same way toward Forth-200x --- it has a lot of gratuitous complication that is pointless from a technical perspective --- the Forth-200x committee are a circle jerk, telling each other that they are mighty smart and pretending that the entire Forth community bows down before them.

This is not to say that I'm totally opposed to OOP --- it can be useful in some circumstances --- my novice package relies heavily on inheritance in the LIST.4TH and ASSOCIATION.4TH data-structures.

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

#42251

Here is the thing about standards, Hugh ...

You have these packages you wrote that you referred to earlier. They look like they would be really useful, and I'm sure you put a lot of effort into creating them. Since they are written to the standard, they are usable in any Forth that complies with the standard.

Now ... my flavor of Forth does not comply, so it is extremely unlikely that I will be able to include those packages as-is in my system. So, without standards, it is really difficult for the community to work together and collaborate to make really amazing stuff.

Therein lies the good thing about standards.

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

#42252

All true. Except that forth people done collaborate. They invent the same wheels over and over again independently. And odd course, they're all best :-;

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

Page 2 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8  Next page →

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

csiph-web