Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #44824 > unrolled thread
| Started by | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-13 04:55 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-02-11 06:53 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 41 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-01-13 04:55 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-01-13 14:26 +0100
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 15:02 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 18:18 -0500
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-01-13 15:47 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-01-13 18:48 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-14 03:07 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-01-14 04:28 +0100
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-01-26 08:57 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. november.nihal@gmail.com - 2016-01-27 10:13 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 00:28 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-01-28 03:50 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-01-14 04:17 +0100
Re: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-01-14 09:29 +1100
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-02-01 06:05 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-02-01 04:03 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-02-01 13:41 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-02-01 07:10 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-02-01 15:01 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-02-01 07:18 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-02-01 19:59 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-02-01 23:13 +0100
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-02-02 02:09 -0500
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 03:55 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-02-02 14:13 +0100
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 06:13 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-02-03 12:00 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-02-03 12:11 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 07:27 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-02-04 01:00 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-02-02 14:37 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-02-02 15:56 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-02-03 12:02 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 08:28 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-02-02 12:39 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-02-02 16:52 +0000
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 14:11 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-02-03 01:50 +0100
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 05:56 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. pandoraefretum@googlemail.com - 2016-02-10 13:38 -0800
Re: Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. josv@planet.nl - 2016-02-11 06:53 -0800
Page 1 of 3 [1] 2 3 Next page →
| From | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-13 04:55 -0800 |
| Subject | Ann: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. |
| Message-ID | <2d006cc9-c256-4072-bdb2-372ed88d4b4d@googlegroups.com> |
Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released. On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it. You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files Jos
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-13 14:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nlbnrgmbf24n.1v0rwwa3xeydw$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #44824 |
Op Wed, 13 Jan 2016 04:55:49 -0800 (PST) schreef josv@planet.nl: > Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released. > On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it. > You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files > > Jos I had to load it via my Linux virtual box and then copy to Windows, because Norton deleted the download and assumed a virus. Rediculous. Installs fine, some complaints about a f.p. library. Install does finish. Nice, LOCATE works more than once and still points to the correct location. The editor doesn't crash after closing it. groet Coos
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-13 15:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6d443b68-4e90-45da-aadc-03971db7595a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #44825 |
Den onsdag 13 januari 2016 kl. 14:27:08 UTC+1 skrev Coos Haak: > Op Wed, 13 Jan 2016 04:55:49 -0800 (PST) schreef josv@planet.nl: > > > Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released. > > On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it. > > You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files > > > > Jos > > I had to load it via my Linux virtual box and then copy to Windows, because > Norton deleted the download and assumed a virus. Rediculous. > > Installs fine, some complaints about a f.p. library. Install does finish. > > Nice, LOCATE works more than once and still points to the correct location. > The editor doesn't crash after closing it. > > groet Coos McAfee consider Win32Forth to be a trojan.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-13 18:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n76lq7$apd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #44844 |
On 1/13/2016 6:02 PM, lehs wrote: > Den onsdag 13 januari 2016 kl. 14:27:08 UTC+1 skrev Coos Haak: >> Op Wed, 13 Jan 2016 04:55:49 -0800 (PST) schreef josv@planet.nl: >> >>> Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released. >>> On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it. >>> You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files >>> >>> Jos >> >> I had to load it via my Linux virtual box and then copy to Windows, because >> Norton deleted the download and assumed a virus. Rediculous. >> >> Installs fine, some complaints about a f.p. library. Install does finish. >> >> Nice, LOCATE works more than once and still points to the correct location. >> The editor doesn't crash after closing it. >> >> groet Coos > > McAfee consider Win32Forth to be a trojan. The AVS I use will fix that sort of problem if you send them a sample file. Will McAfee fix their product if you send them a sample? This has come up before with Win32Forth. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-13 15:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3c0e5f6f-4ceb-493e-9bbb-8402a80d6cad@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #44845 |
Hi, Before Win32Forth was released I tested it with VirusTotaal. Result: Detection ratio: 8 / 55 Some results of the 55: Antivirus Result Update Antiy-AVL Trojan/Win32.TSGeneric 20160113 Bkav HW32.Packed.1440 20160113 Cyren W32/Parasitic-Fileinfector-base 20160113 F-Prot W32/Parasitic-Fileinfector-base 20160111 Fortinet W32/AutoRun.C!worm 20160113 McAfee-GW-Edition BehavesLike.Win32.FakeSecTool.wc 20160113 Qihoo-360 HEUR/QVM19.1.Malware.Gen 20160113 Rising PE:Malware.XPACK/RDM!5.1 [F] 20160113 AVG 20160113 McAfee 20160113 Microsoft 20160113 Symantec 20160112 So I am a bit surprised to hear Norton and McAfee generate a false positive. Telling those firms that it is a false positive is impossible for me since they begin asking questions over their 'product' that I do not have. So I would be happy if the owners of those Antivirus products will tell them that it is a false positive. Jos On 14 januari 2016 00:18:04 UTC+1 rickman wrote: > On 1/13/2016 6:02 PM, lehs wrote: > > Den onsdag 13 januari 2016 kl. 14:27:08 UTC+1 skrev Coos Haak: > >> Op Wed, 13 Jan 2016 04:55:49 -0800 (PST) schreef josv@...: > >> > >>> Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released. > >>> On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it. > >>> You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files > >>> > >>> Jos > >> > >> I had to load it via my Linux virtual box and then copy to Windows, because > >> Norton deleted the download and assumed a virus. Rediculous. > >> > >> Installs fine, some complaints about a f.p. library. Install does finish. > >> > >> Nice, LOCATE works more than once and still points to the correct location. > >> The editor doesn't crash after closing it. > >> > >> groet Coos > > > > McAfee consider Win32Forth to be a trojan. > > The AVS I use will fix that sort of problem if you send them a sample > file. Will McAfee fix their product if you send them a sample? This > has come up before with Win32Forth. > > -- > > Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-13 18:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6e47ff9f-2d45-43ba-9606-4a616e11f4cc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #44846 |
On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 4:47:27 PM UTC-7, jo...@planet.nl wrote: > So I am a bit surprised to hear Norton and McAfee generate a false positive. Does Alex McDonald still have write privilege? I'm more inclined to trust Norton and McAfee than Alex McDonald.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-14 03:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n773dh$cn0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #44850 |
hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 4:47:27 PM UTC-7, jo...@planet.nl wrote: > > So I am a bit surprised to hear Norton and McAfee generate a false positive. > > Does Alex McDonald still have write privilege? I'm more > inclined to trust Norton and McAfee than Alex McDonald. I think that these anti-virus programs make quite a few mistakes. Years ago, one gave a false positive for gforth. Recently, one did the same for OCaml. -- Amazon bans book. After nearly a month on the site, all traces of the book and its 80 reviews have been removed. http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/11/debunking-sandy-hook-debunkers-5.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEl_1HWFRfo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-14 04:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n774fe$g7h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #44846 |
josv@planet.nl wrote: > So I am a bit surprised to hear Norton and McAfee generate a false > positive. Telling those firms that it is a false positive is impossible > for me since they begin asking questions over their 'product' that I do > not have. > > So I would be happy if the owners of those Antivirus products will tell > them that it is a false positive. No, having submitted that to Virustotal, which operates the tools legally and licensed is perfectly ok. You can directly address them with "I submitted the file to VirusTotal prior to distribution, and 8 (now 9) out of the entire 53 had a false positive; yours included. Fix that." Fortunately, there's no false positive on Gforth, I'm just preparing a distribution, too. -- 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 | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-26 08:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0ce48444-8035-4717-8e0a-f0ae0317742f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #44855 |
Hi, There is some progress. After the defender also blocked the installer I took some action. By now Microsoft and Semantec have removed their false positive. Update your virus scanner when you still have a problem. McAfee did not react at all. (&*^%*) Jos On 14 januari 2016 04:28:19 UTC+1 Bernd Paysan wrote: > jos wrote: > > So I am a bit surprised to hear Norton and McAfee generate a false > > positive. Telling those firms that it is a false positive is impossible > > for me since they begin asking questions over their 'product' that I do > > not have. > > > > So I would be happy if the owners of those Antivirus products will tell > > them that it is a false positive. > > No, having submitted that to Virustotal, which operates the tools legally > and licensed is perfectly ok. You can directly address them with "I > submitted the file to VirusTotal prior to distribution, and 8 (now 9) out of > the entire 53 had a false positive; yours included. Fix that." > > Fortunately, there's no false positive on Gforth, I'm just preparing a > distribution, too. > > -- > 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 | november.nihal@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-27 10:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b678c785-d966-48d1-be6c-0dcf074c9dd8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #45092 |
I am surprised that no one has asked the question what is it in the EXE that sets off the false positives. I don't have the email to hand but I am sure I read on the yahoo group that it was something to do the PE header. Is that still the case or is it something completely different ? NN
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-28 00:28 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a08a1b75-c4df-41d0-8abd-e98c63c3f144@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #45114 |
On Wednesday, 27 January 2016 18:13:26 UTC, novembe...@gmail.com wrote: > I am surprised that no one has asked the question what is it in the EXE that sets off the false positives. > > I don't have the email to hand but I am sure I read on the yahoo group that it was something to do the PE header. > > Is that still the case or is it something completely different ? > > NN I don't think it's the EXE per se. The anti-virus systems in question have noticed that when these Forth systems are running, they write into their own (executable) memory space. This is a known technique of virus writers, where payload code is stored in an executable in an obfuscated format, and unpacked at trigger time to deliver its payload/penis enhancment advert. This then gets reported back to the Anti Virus Mothership, and that particular EXE signature is thus ever marked as suspicious.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-28 03:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2e52fe9e-f9c4-47c1-93f2-81720f281347@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #45131 |
On 28 januari 2016 09:28:15 UTC+1 Mark Wills wrote: Good point from NN Before I decided to notify the antivirus makers I looked into it. At some point the code part of the PE image was changed into run and read only for a small program. That did not help. The scanner at VirusTotal stil reports false positives. Most important was the comment from: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7621638/software-protection-code-obfuscation-that-does-not-trigger-antivirus-false-pos "The false-positives come from "signatures" matching known malware. For example, if some malware uses upx to compress, and a scanner finds upx compiled into your app, you may be mis-identified. You could get a false-positive just because a scanner saw that you are using Delphi (or any other compiler, for that matter). But the more obscure, the higher confidence that the scanner thinks: "I've found something UNIQUE in here", and cross-references with its catalog of known malware. " "Packers that pack binaries will always produce a suspicious result since they act much like a virus would" The solution from Microsoft was: Analyst Comments ================ -- 1/26/2016 3:05:11 PM -- Signature removed Jos > On Wednesday, 27 January 2016 18:13:26 UTC, novembe...@gmail.com wrote: > > I am surprised that no one has asked the question what is it in the EXE that sets off the false positives. > > > > I don't have the email to hand but I am sure I read on the yahoo group that it was something to do the PE header. > > > > Is that still the case or is it something completely different ? > > > > NN > > I don't think it's the EXE per se. The anti-virus systems in question > have noticed that when these Forth systems are running, they write into > their own (executable) memory space. This is a known technique of virus > writers, where payload code is stored in an executable in an obfuscated > format, and unpacked at trigger time to deliver its payload/penis > enhancment advert. > > This then gets reported back to the Anti Virus Mothership, and that > particular EXE signature is thus ever marked as suspicious.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-14 04:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n773r3$dpq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #44845 |
rickman wrote: > The AVS I use will fix that sort of problem if you send them a sample > file. Will McAfee fix their product if you send them a sample? This > has come up before with Win32Forth. Virustotal shows that the following snake oil claims Win32Forth (most recent binary) to be "malware". Antiy-AVL Trojan/Win32.TSGeneric 20160114 Bkav HW32.Packed.1440 20160113 Cyren W32/Parasitic-Fileinfector-base 20160114 F-Prot W32/Parasitic-Fileinfector-base 20160111 Fortinet W32/AutoRun.C!worm 20160114 McAfee Artemis!D3749C9E5EF9 20160114 McAfee-GW-Edition BehavesLike.Win32.FakeSecTool.wc 20160114 Qihoo-360 HEUR/QVM19.1.Malware.Gen 20160114 Rising PE:Malware.XPACK/RDM!5.1 [F] 20160113 Looks pretty scary ;-). I would have a word with the snake oil vendors if I was maintainer of Win32Forth. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ* http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-14 09:29 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: A new version of Win32Forth has been released. |
| Message-ID | <n76j3k$iet$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #44824 |
josv@planet.nl wrote: > Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released. > On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install > it. You can download the new version from: > http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files > > Jos Is it mirrored elsewhere as sourceforge is incompatible with older browers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 06:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n8msdm$bo9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #44824 |
On 13/01/2016 12:55, josv@planet.nl wrote:
> Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released.
> On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it.
> You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files
>
Did you try running the ANS Forth/Forth 2012 test suite? Running them
under 32 bit Windows 7 (with warnings turned off) doesn't even run the
long established Hayes core.fr test program when it is INCLUDED. The
output is:
---------------------------
Win32Forth: a 32 Bit Forth for Windows 95/98/ME/NT4/W2K/XP/VISTA/W7/W8/W10
Version: 6.15.04 Build: 4
Compiled: Monday, February 01 2016, 4:08AM
Platform: Windows 7 Home Premium, 8,747k bytes free
2,813 Words in Application dictionary
2,631 Words in System dictionary
5,444 Words total in dictionaries
20,312 Windows Constants available
Loading Win32For.CFG
Loading Win32ForUser.CFG
Current directory is: D:\Projects\ForthApps\ForthSystemTests\ANSTests
Program path is: d:\programs\Win32Forth\Win32for.exe
Forth path is: d:\programs\Win32Forth\
Application path is: not set
System Editor is: Win32Forth IDE
Running ANS Forth and Forth 2012 test programs, version 0.13.1
*****************
^^^^^
Error(-13): ENGTH is undefined
ok
-------------------
It seems to go haywire in the test:
T{ GE1 EVALUATE -> 123 }T ( TEST EVALUATE IN INTERP. STATE )
and jumps several lines down in the test file. The 'ENGTH' in the error
message seems to come from the line:
DROP -> 0 }T \ BLANK LINE RETURN ZERO-LENGTH STRING
The tests work OK when typed in so is the problem to do with input
source handling?
--
Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 04:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <22414f72-b069-4dc9-90be-fb0005ccd2be@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #45224 |
Hi Gerry,
Not recently. I just tried release 0.13 (27 Nov 2015) and experienced a number of errors.
The pack is a Forth 2012-test-suite
Win32Forth is based on the ANS Forth Standard X3J14 dated March 24, 1994.
Win32Forth does not claim to be a Forth 2012 system.
I do not know if all errors are due to this difference.
Jos
On februari 2016 07:05:21 UTC+1 Gerry wrote:
> On 13/01/2016 12:55, josv... wrote:
> > Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released.
> > On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it.
> > You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files
> >
>
> Did you try running the ANS Forth/Forth 2012 test suite? Running them
> under 32 bit Windows 7 (with warnings turned off) doesn't even run the
> long established Hayes core.fr test program when it is INCLUDED. The
> output is:
>
> ---------------------------
> Win32Forth: a 32 Bit Forth for Windows 95/98/ME/NT4/W2K/XP/VISTA/W7/W8/W10
> Version: 6.15.04 Build: 4
> Compiled: Monday, February 01 2016, 4:08AM
> Platform: Windows 7 Home Premium, 8,747k bytes free
> 2,813 Words in Application dictionary
> 2,631 Words in System dictionary
> 5,444 Words total in dictionaries
> 20,312 Windows Constants available
> Loading Win32For.CFG
> Loading Win32ForUser.CFG
>
> Current directory is: D:\Projects\ForthApps\ForthSystemTests\ANSTests
> Program path is: d:\programs\Win32Forth\Win32for.exe
> Forth path is: d:\programs\Win32Forth\
> Application path is: not set
>
> System Editor is: Win32Forth IDE
>
> Running ANS Forth and Forth 2012 test programs, version 0.13.1
>
> *****************
> ^^^^^
> Error(-13): ENGTH is undefined
> ok
> -------------------
>
> It seems to go haywire in the test:
> T{ GE1 EVALUATE -> 123 }T ( TEST EVALUATE IN INTERP. STATE )
> and jumps several lines down in the test file. The 'ENGTH' in the error
> message seems to come from the line:
> DROP -> 0 }T \ BLANK LINE RETURN ZERO-LENGTH STRING
>
> The tests work OK when typed in so is the problem to do with input
> source handling?
>
>
> --
> Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 13:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n8nn44$ia8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #45233 |
On 01/02/2016 12:03, josv@planet.nl wrote:
> Hi Gerry,
>
> Not recently. I just tried release 0.13 (27 Nov 2015) and experienced a number of errors.
> The pack is a Forth 2012-test-suite
> Win32Forth is based on the ANS Forth Standard X3J14 dated March 24, 1994.
> Win32Forth does not claim to be a Forth 2012 system.
> I do not know if all errors are due to this difference.
>
I only mentioned core.fr which doesn't contain any Forth 2012 words,
only ANS Forth core words. The test that fails is definitely ANS Forth:
TESTING EVALUATE
: GE1 S" 123" ; IMMEDIATE
: GE2 S" 123 1+" ; IMMEDIATE
: GE3 S" : GE4 345 ;" ;
: GE5 EVALUATE ; IMMEDIATE
T{ GE1 EVALUATE -> 123 }T ( TEST EVALUATE IN INTERP. STATE )
which works in isolation but not when the file core.fr is INCLUDED. It
doesn't just fail the test, it seems to skip lines of code in the file.
Do you have another test suite that you run to prove the system every
time you modify or add something and when you release a new version? If
so it ought to include at least core.fr. If not how do you and
Win32Forth users have confidence that Win32Forth doesn't fail simple
things such as the above?
Aren't you ever going to update Win32Forth to Forth 2012? If not it will
fall behind the other major desktop systems.
Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 07:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0861adad-d7ec-4475-a3a8-df44dd05f618@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #45234 |
Hi,
Win32Forth will get behind due to a lack of active developers at this moment.
Perhaps (I hope) that will change in the future.
Jos
1 februari 2016 14:41:05 UTC+1 wrote Gerry:
> On 01/02/2016 12:03, jos... wrote:
> > Hi Gerry,
> >
> > Not recently. I just tried release 0.13 (27 Nov 2015) and experienced a number of errors.
> > The pack is a Forth 2012-test-suite
> > Win32Forth is based on the ANS Forth Standard X3J14 dated March 24, 1994.
> > Win32Forth does not claim to be a Forth 2012 system.
> > I do not know if all errors are due to this difference.
> >
>
> I only mentioned core.fr which doesn't contain any Forth 2012 words,
> only ANS Forth core words. The test that fails is definitely ANS Forth:
>
> TESTING EVALUATE
>
> : GE1 S" 123" ; IMMEDIATE
> : GE2 S" 123 1+" ; IMMEDIATE
> : GE3 S" : GE4 345 ;" ;
> : GE5 EVALUATE ; IMMEDIATE
>
> T{ GE1 EVALUATE -> 123 }T ( TEST EVALUATE IN INTERP. STATE )
>
> which works in isolation but not when the file core.fr is INCLUDED. It
> doesn't just fail the test, it seems to skip lines of code in the file.
>
> Do you have another test suite that you run to prove the system every
> time you modify or add something and when you release a new version? If
> so it ought to include at least core.fr. If not how do you and
> Win32Forth users have confidence that Win32Forth doesn't fail simple
> things such as the above?
>
> Aren't you ever going to update Win32Forth to Forth 2012? If not it will
> fall behind the other major desktop systems.
>
> Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 15:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <56af7352$0$23733$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #45233 |
josv@planet.nl writes:
>Hi Gerry,
>Not recently. I just tried release 0.13 (27 Nov 2015) and experienced a number of errors.
>The pack is a Forth 2012-test-suite
>Win32Forth is based on the ANS Forth Standard X3J14 dated March 24, 1994.
>Win32Forth does not claim to be a Forth 2012 system.
>I do not know if all errors are due to this difference.
>Jos
>On februari 2016 07:05:21 UTC+1 Gerry wrote:
>> On 13/01/2016 12:55, josv... wrote:
>> > Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released.
>> > On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it.
>> > You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files
>> >
>>
>> Did you try running the ANS Forth/Forth 2012 test suite? Running them
>> under 32 bit Windows 7 (with warnings turned off) doesn't even run the
>> long established Hayes core.fr test program when it is INCLUDED. The
>> output is:
>>
>> ---------------------------
>> Win32Forth: a 32 Bit Forth for Windows 95/98/ME/NT4/W2K/XP/VISTA/W7/W8/W10
>> Version: 6.15.04 Build: 4
>> Compiled: Monday, February 01 2016, 4:08AM
>> Platform: Windows 7 Home Premium, 8,747k bytes free
>> 2,813 Words in Application dictionary
>> 2,631 Words in System dictionary
>> 5,444 Words total in dictionaries
>> 20,312 Windows Constants available
>> Loading Win32For.CFG
>> Loading Win32ForUser.CFG
>>
>> Current directory is: D:\Projects\ForthApps\ForthSystemTests\ANSTests
>> Program path is: d:\programs\Win32Forth\Win32for.exe
>> Forth path is: d:\programs\Win32Forth\
>> Application path is: not set
>>
>> System Editor is: Win32Forth IDE
>>
>> Running ANS Forth and Forth 2012 test programs, version 0.13.1
>>
>> *****************
>> ^^^^^
>> Error(-13): ENGTH is undefined
>> ok
>> -------------------
>>
>> It seems to go haywire in the test:
>> T{ GE1 EVALUATE -> 123 }T ( TEST EVALUATE IN INTERP. STATE )
>> and jumps several lines down in the test file. The 'ENGTH' in the error
>> message seems to come from the line:
>> DROP -> 0 }T \ BLANK LINE RETURN ZERO-LENGTH STRING
>>
>> The tests work OK when typed in so is the problem to do with input
>> source handling?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Gerry
Input source handling can be tricky. If you copied the test from a
unix system without converting it to a MS-DOS text file, tests
may fail.
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 07:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a15f69dc-93f5-4867-8cab-7ab962ce3cfe@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #45235 |
Indeed, When i loaded core.fr into the IDE and saved it, it ran without problems.
Jos
On 1 februari 2016 16:01:52 UTC+1 Albert van der Horst wrote:
> jos... writes:
>
> >Hi Gerry,
>
> >Not recently. I just tried release 0.13 (27 Nov 2015) and experienced a number of errors.
> >The pack is a Forth 2012-test-suite
> >Win32Forth is based on the ANS Forth Standard X3J14 dated March 24, 1994.
> >Win32Forth does not claim to be a Forth 2012 system.
> >I do not know if all errors are due to this difference.
>
> >Jos
>
> >On februari 2016 07:05:21 UTC+1 Gerry wrote:
> >> On 13/01/2016 12:55, josv... wrote:
> >> > Win32Forth version 6.15.04 has been released.
> >> > On my PC the added Forth-installer took less then 2 minutes to decompress and install it.
> >> > You can download the new version from: http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32forth/files
> >> >
> >>
> >> Did you try running the ANS Forth/Forth 2012 test suite? Running them
> >> under 32 bit Windows 7 (with warnings turned off) doesn't even run the
> >> long established Hayes core.fr test program when it is INCLUDED. The
> >> output is:
> >>
> >> ---------------------------
> >> Win32Forth: a 32 Bit Forth for Windows 95/98/ME/NT4/W2K/XP/VISTA/W7/W8/W10
> >> Version: 6.15.04 Build: 4
> >> Compiled: Monday, February 01 2016, 4:08AM
> >> Platform: Windows 7 Home Premium, 8,747k bytes free
> >> 2,813 Words in Application dictionary
> >> 2,631 Words in System dictionary
> >> 5,444 Words total in dictionaries
> >> 20,312 Windows Constants available
> >> Loading Win32For.CFG
> >> Loading Win32ForUser.CFG
> >>
> >> Current directory is: D:\Projects\ForthApps\ForthSystemTests\ANSTests
> >> Program path is: d:\programs\Win32Forth\Win32for.exe
> >> Forth path is: d:\programs\Win32Forth\
> >> Application path is: not set
> >>
> >> System Editor is: Win32Forth IDE
> >>
> >> Running ANS Forth and Forth 2012 test programs, version 0.13.1
> >>
> >> *****************
> >> ^^^^^
> >> Error(-13): ENGTH is undefined
> >> ok
> >> -------------------
> >>
> >> It seems to go haywire in the test:
> >> T{ GE1 EVALUATE -> 123 }T ( TEST EVALUATE IN INTERP. STATE )
> >> and jumps several lines down in the test file. The 'ENGTH' in the error
> >> message seems to come from the line:
> >> DROP -> 0 }T \ BLANK LINE RETURN ZERO-LENGTH STRING
> >>
> >> The tests work OK when typed in so is the problem to do with input
> >> source handling?
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Gerry
>
> Input source handling can be tricky. If you copied the test from a
> unix system without converting it to a MS-DOS text file, tests
> may fail.
> --
> Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
> Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
> albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 3 [1] 2 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web