Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #48645 > unrolled thread
| Started by | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-07-01 16:10 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-08-12 11:05 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 151 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
3rd RfD: Quotations anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-07-01 16:10 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-01 11:21 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 11:58 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-01 12:53 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 16:05 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-07-01 19:00 -0500
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-01 18:22 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-07-01 21:16 -0500
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Wasell <from_usenet@wasell.eu> - 2016-07-02 13:04 +0200
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-07-02 09:39 -0500
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-07-02 16:33 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-07-02 11:50 -0500
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 10:45 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:24 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-07-03 11:48 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-03 07:08 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 11:49 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-04 08:25 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-04 16:57 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-07-05 07:40 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-05 01:38 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations alex@rivadpm.com - 2016-07-05 01:33 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-05 02:28 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 10:06 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-07-05 20:57 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 00:12 +0300
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-07-05 22:45 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 10:50 +0300
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-07-06 03:31 -0500
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-08 09:07 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-07-04 21:08 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-04 09:10 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-07-02 19:24 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-02 16:19 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 23:18 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-02 21:54 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 03:10 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-07-03 09:35 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:19 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-03 01:45 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 11:52 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:10 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-07-02 13:27 -1000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-02 16:54 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 23:27 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-08-05 00:30 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-07-08 21:15 +1000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-08 07:39 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-07-09 17:08 +1000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-07-08 23:22 -1000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-07-08 20:42 +1000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-07-01 21:51 +0100
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-01 17:57 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-01 18:47 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-02 07:55 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-04 17:03 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations alex@rivadpm.com - 2016-07-05 01:38 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 10:16 -0400
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-05 10:48 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-07-05 20:18 +0200
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-08-05 00:42 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations julian.fondren@endurance.com - 2016-08-04 19:44 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-06 21:01 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-07 07:54 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-08 08:17 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-08 08:41 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <ayrnieu@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 10:21 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-08 14:29 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-08 22:28 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-09 03:56 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-09 09:51 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-13 01:25 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-13 01:56 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-13 02:09 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-13 14:04 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-14 00:32 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-14 01:25 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 14:52 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 20:25 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 12:46 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 14:38 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 16:03 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 17:27 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-14 02:46 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 08:33 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-15 16:59 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 23:30 -0700
Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-16 02:42 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 05:47 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-07-16 15:41 +0200
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-16 07:16 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-16 07:27 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 09:52 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-16 11:46 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 03:11 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 03:18 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 03:47 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-17 05:43 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 06:00 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 08:32 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-17 23:49 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 00:39 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 07:57 -0700
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-07-18 12:18 +0200
Re: Universal Delimiters - was Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 04:04 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-10 21:23 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2016-07-09 14:30 +0200
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations mhx@iae.nl - 2016-07-09 05:51 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-07-09 09:01 -0500
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-09 07:40 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-07-09 12:27 -0500
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-09 11:24 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-30 02:03 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-07-09 14:36 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Håkan Thörngren <hth313@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 12:58 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 21:59 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-09 23:11 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 00:14 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-12 01:06 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-12 05:31 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-12 09:00 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-13 03:44 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-13 11:36 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-13 23:03 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-14 01:23 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-07-12 08:57 -1000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-12 22:53 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 01:09 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-10 18:18 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-11 01:35 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 18:18 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 08:24 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-07-10 06:53 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Håkan Thörngren <hth313@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 00:53 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-07-10 16:57 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-07-10 02:26 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-10 06:49 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-10 11:04 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2016-07-10 12:51 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-07-10 13:21 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 13:23 -0700
3rd RfD: Quotations anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-07-28 16:56 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-07-28 16:29 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-29 00:50 +0000
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 12:15 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 13:25 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 20:57 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 13:59 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-11 21:11 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 00:30 -0700
Re: 3rd RfD: Quotations hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-08-12 11:05 -0700
Page 1 of 8 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 16:10 +0000 |
| Subject | 3rd RfD: Quotations |
| Message-ID | <2016Jul1.181039@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
RfD: Quotations
---------------
Change history
--------------
28Jul2015 Alex McDonald v1 initial draft
04Aug2015 Alex McDonald v2 update
added & extended "Rationale", "Discussion"
formalised "Specification"
corrected "Implementation"
added "References"
01Jul2016 Anton Ertl v3
various non-substantive changes throughout
removed revised definition of RECURSE
revised the stack effect to have quotation-sys colon-sys
revised the specification wording
added tests
Quotations
==========
The essence of quotations is to provide nested colon definitions,
in which the inner definition(s) are nameless. The expression
: foo ... [: some words ;] ... ;
is equivalent to
:noname some words ; Constant #temp#
: foo ... #temp# ... ;
A simple quotation is an anonymous colon definition that is defined
inside a colon definition or quotation.
Rationale
---------
There is no situation where quotations cannot be implemented by
existing Forth words. Specifcially, :NONAME and : provide all the
features proposed for quotations. Their advantage is as a syntactic
"sugar" that permits a nameless definition in close proximity to its
use; and that it avoids generating one-use names only for the purpose
of refering to the definition inside another word.
One example use of quotations is to provide a solution to the use
of CATCH in a form close to other languages' TRY ... EXCEPT
blocks.
: hex. ( u -- )
base @ >r
[: hex u. ;] catch
r> base ! throw ;
The advantage of using CATCH here is that the BASE is restored even if
there is an exception (e.g., a user interrupt) during the "U.".
Moreover, return-address manipulation has often been used as a way to
split a definition into several parts, e.g,:
: foo bar list> bla blub ;
where LIST> is a return-address manipulating word and executes the BLA
BLUB part of the word possibly several times. This demonstrates that
introducing a helper definition is unattractive to these programmers;
with quotations this code could be written without helper word as
: foo bar [: bla blub ;] map-list ;
The advantages of this variant are: 1) Implementating quotations puts
less restrictions on the Forth system than implementing manipulable
return-addresses (which would restrict tail-call elimination and
inlining). 2) It is immediately visible to the reader that there is a
separate definition containing BLA BLUB.
Experience
----------
Under the term "Phrases", quotations have been in MacForth since at
least 1987. They are documented in the infamous "missing chapter" of
the MacForth manual.
Implementations exist in (at least) VFX, Gforth and iForth, and in the
iForth case appear to have some significant use and history. The
Gforth development version from 2016-06-28 contains 70 occurences of
";]".
Interactions
------------
Quotations change the "current definition" that a number of words (in
particular, RECURSE, DOES> and locals) refer to, so we have to look at
the interactions of these words and locals. In these interactions
there is a conflict between interface simplicity and implementation
simplicity; disallowing all combinations of quotations and these words
would give most freedom to implementors to choose the simplest
implementation; but it would make for an interface full of blind
alleys: If you choose one feature, you cannot choose any of the
others; and if you use one feature, and then find you need another
one, you have to back out of using the first one. Moreover, all these
restrictions would have to be specified in the standard.
This is not desirable, so here we propose to make all these words work
for quotations as well as they work for standalone definitions; this
is relatively cheap to implement.
RECURSE
RECURSE inside a quotation calls the quotation directly surrounding
the RECURSE, not the containing colon definition.
DOES>
A DOES> part inside a quotation ends with the terminating ";]"
Using DOES> is actually a useful example of using quotations. E.g.,
<https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/struct.fs> contains two
helper words (DOFIELD and DOZEROFIELD) in the following code:
: dofield ( -- )
does> ( name execution: addr1 -- addr2 )
@ + ;
: dozerofield ( -- )
immediate
does> ( name execution: -- )
drop ;
: field ( align1 offset1 align size "name" -- align2 offset2 )
\ name execution: addr1 -- addr2
2 pick >r \ this uglyness is just for optimizing with dozerofield
create-field
r> if \ offset<>0
dofield
else
dozerofield
then ;
Quotations allow to write this more compactly as:
: field ( align1 offset1 align size "name" -- align2 offset2 )
\ name execution: addr1 -- addr2
2 pick >r \ this uglyness is just for optimizing with dozerofield
create-field
r> if \ offset<>0
[: does> ( addr1 -- addr2 ) @ + ;]
else
immediate [: does> ( -- ) drop ;]
then
execute ;
The second RfD proposed to allow RECURSE after DOES> in general
(currently it is ambiguous), but this is not common practice yet, so
the present version removed this part of the proposal in order to
focus on the quotations proper.
Locals
A quotation may not be able to access the locals of the outer word
because it has no knowledge of when it might be executed and hence
whether outer locals are still alive. It does permit defining and
accessing its own locals. Note that this means that both the
quotation and the containing definition may define locals.
: foo ... [: {: a b :} a b + ;] ... ; \ unambiguous
: bar {: a b :} ... [: a b + ;] ... ; \ ambiguous
: bla {: a ;} ... [: {: b ;} ... b ... ;] ... a ... ; \ unambiguous
The present proposal does not propose that a quotation can access the
locals of a containing definition, because the implementation would be
relatively complex, impose a run-time overhead, and the lifetime of
the locals would be restricted (unless we are willing to accept
further complexity). While there are a number of people who are very
keen to have such a feature, it is not clear how much it would be
used. System implementors are encouraged to provide support for
accessing outer locals on an experimental basis so that programmers
can explore the usefulness of this feature, possibly resulting in a
proposal for this feature in the future.
Syntax
------
The following notations have been seen in the wild, oldest first.
:| ... |;
:[ ... ]:
[: ... ;]
The notation [: ;] appears to have popular support.
Specification
-------------
New system-compilation type quotation-sys with an
implementation-dependent size on the stack. This type contains the
data that needs to be saved for the enclosing colon definition and
restored after the end of the quotation. [Note: we use it in
combination with colon-sys, because DOES> uses colon-sys during
compilation.]
[: bracket-colon
Interpretation: Interpretation semantics for this word are undefined.
Compilation: ( -- quotation-sys colon-sys )
suspends compiling to the current definition, starts a new nested
definition with executeion token xt, and compilation continues with
this nested definition. Locals may be defined in the nested
definition. An ambiguous condition exists if a name is used that
satisfies the following constraints: 1) It is not the name of a
currently visible local of the current quotation. 2) It is the name
of a local that was visible right before the start of the present
quotation or any of the containing quotations.
;] semi-bracket
Interpretation: Interpretation semantics for this word are undefined.
Compilation: ( c: quotation-sys colon-sys -- )
Ends the current nested definition, and resumes compilation to the
previous (containing) current definition. It appends the following
run-time to the (containing) current definition:
run-time: ( -- xt )
xt is the execution token of the nested definition.
Todo
----
The stack effects allow the following:
: foo [: ." a" ; : bar ." b " ;] ;
foo execute \ prints "a"
bar \ prints "b"
This actually works in Gforth. Do we want to make this a standard
program or not? In either case, we need some wording to make our
intent clear.
Implementation
--------------
It is not possible to define quotations in ISO Forth. The following
is an outline definition, where SAVE-DEFINITION-STATE and RESTORE-
DEFINITION-STATE require carnal knowledge of the system and are left
to the implementor.
: [: ( c: -- quotation-sys colon-sys )
postpone ahead save-definition-state :noname ; immediate
: ;] ( c: quotation-sys colon-sys -- ) ( s: -- xt )
postpone ; >r restore-definition-state
postpone then r> postpone literal ; immediate
Compliance Tests
----------------
\ works on Gforth:
T{ : q1 [: 1 ;] ; q1 execute -> 1 }T
T{ : q2 [: [: 2 ;] ;] ; q2 execute execute -> 2 }T
T{ : q3 {: a :} [: {: a b :} b a ;] ; 1 2 3 q3 execute -> 2 1 }T
T{ : q4 [: dup if dup 1- recurse then ;] ; 3 q4 execute .s -> 3 2 1 0 }T
T{ : q5 [: does> drop 4 ;] 5 swap ; create x q5 execute x -> 5 4 }T
References
----------
Stephen Pelc wrote this; see
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Comp/comp.lang.forth/2012-07/msg00791.html
I (Alex McDonald) have taken it and modified it as a proposed RfD,
and have removed the discussion of closures. http://www.forth200x.org/
I (Anton Ertl) have taken it and revised it.
The following notes on quotations and closures incorporate material
from several people, including Anton Ertl, Andrew Haley, Marcel
Hendrix, Ward Mcfarland, Bernd Paysan, and Elizabeth Rather. If you
have been left out and want acknowledgement, please let me know.
Additional contributors; Hugh Aguilar and Gerry Jackson.
[Note]
The phrase "ambiguous condition" has a specific meaning in Forth
standards. An ambiguous condition is "a circumstance for which this
standard does not prescribe a specific behavior". The RfD process
also states: "If you want to leave something open to the system
implementor, make that explicit, e.g., by making it an ambiguous
condition."
- 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 2016: http://www.euroforth.org/ef16/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 11:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6a27de86-fb60-4e68-b2b8-032ecf4f3282@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #48645 |
On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 9:13:35 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote: > RfD: Quotations > --------------- > > Change history > -------------- > 28Jul2015 Alex McDonald v1 initial draft > 04Aug2015 Alex McDonald v2 update > added & extended "Rationale", "Discussion" > formalised "Specification" > corrected "Implementation" > added "References" > 01Jul2016 Anton Ertl v3 > various non-substantive changes throughout > removed revised definition of RECURSE > revised the stack effect to have quotation-sys colon-sys > revised the specification wording > added tests So, you weren't able to find another pocket boy to put his name on the RfD for the Paysan-faked quotations. Forth-200x is astro-turf --- this is just a marketing gimmick from Forth Inc. that is being faked up to look like a grass-roots effort from the Forth community. Your astro-turfing is a failure though when the spec is written by Leon Wagner, the code is written by Bernd Paysan, and the RfD is written by Anton Ertl --- this is clearly not coming from the Forth community --- this is coming straight from Forth Inc.. I don't think that ANS-Forth or Forth-200x have any support from the Forth community. You have a long history of claiming to have support from people who don't support you --- ANS-Forth lists both Ray Duncan and Charles Moore as supporters, but neither of them supports ANS-Forth --- ANS-Forth came from the Forth Inc. marketing department and it was totally faked up to look like it came from the Forth community. > The essence of quotations is to provide nested colon definitions, > in which the inner definition(s) are nameless. The expression > > : foo ... [: some words ;] ... ; > > is equivalent to > > :noname some words ; Constant #temp# > : foo ... #temp# ... ; > > A simple quotation is an anonymous colon definition that is defined > inside a colon definition or quotation. This is utter crap! Your "quotation" does not have access to the parent function's local variables --- I have said this 100 times --- I will say it again 100 times. > Additional contributors; Hugh Aguilar If you list my name as a contributor to Forth-200x I will sue you for libel. I said this before when Alex McDonald listed my name in the RfD, and so he removed it, but now you have put it back in again. I am not playing around --- I will seriously sue you for a lot of money, and I will win.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 11:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9253068f-e147-44c8-b423-8b482b7267ac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #48648 |
On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 1:21:26 PM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > Forth-200x is astro-turf --- this is just a marketing gimmick from Forth Inc. that is being faked up to look like a grass-roots effort from the Forth community. > You've used a few modern Forth systems now. Why don't you take a look at Forth-200x features, and write them down in a table, and then see which of your systems implements them in the latest stable release? This can be a nice research project for clf. Before you do so, please keep this question in mind: if Forth-200x were some kind of Forth, Inc. marketing ploy, would it be odd for SwiftForth to not implement all of the new features? Oh, right. Although you have SwiftForth 3.0, you don't have a subscription. You could still go by the changelog... but, oh well, I'll just tell you: SwiftForth implements almost nothing from Forth-200x. gforth does quite a bit better but only in unreleased versions. There *is* a Forth system that widely implements Forth-200x in the latest releases, even tracking it closely enough to implement e.g. both PARSE-WORD and PARSE-NAME even though one of these was renamed to the other in the standard and both are new to Forth-200x. But that system is not SwiftForth. Now that I've told you that, do you think that it's odd? > > I am not playing around --- I will seriously sue you for a lot of money, and I will win. -- Julian (many thanks to Hugh Aguilar for this post. I couldn't have written this without his input.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 12:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ff6ce821-8fc8-48ce-ab15-23316da2dd5e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #48656 |
On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 11:58:54 AM UTC-7, Julian Fondren wrote:
> SwiftForth implements almost nothing from Forth-200x.
> ...
> Now that I've told you that, do you think that it's odd?
Forth-200x is mandated to be 100% compatible with ANS-Forth. This means that no SwiftForth legacy code gets broken. It doesn't really matter what features get added to Forth-200x and do not get supported by SwiftForth, because SwiftForth will still be considered to be Forth-200x compliant --- if you write a Forth-200x program fails to work under SwiftForth, you will be blamed for writing a non-standard program --- this is the same as now with ANS-Forth; for example, if you write a program that assumes that the control-stack is distinct from the data-stack (legal in ANS-Forth) your program will not work under SwiftForth and you will get blamed for writing a non-standard program.
The only "legacy code" that the Forth-200x committee cares about is SwiftForth legacy code. For about a quarter of a century, going back to a time prior to the existence of ANS-Forth, all the Forthers have used { to define local variables (the John Hopkins Format). There is a lot of legacy code that uses { for local variables. At Forth Inc. however, { is used for multi-line comments. Because of this, Forth-200x couldn't use { for defining locals and had to invent a new name {: instead. The breaks pretty much all of the Forth code that uses local, including ANS-Forth code, written in the last quarter of a century --- except for the SwiftForth code that continues to use { to define multi-line comments --- in SwiftForth version-2, (LOCAL) would crash the system when used; the fact that this bug got put in a production release indicates that nobody at Forth Inc. ever tested (LOCAL) at all, which indicates that there is no Forth Inc. legacy code that uses locals.
Elizabeth Rather doesn't want to use locals, and she doesn't want the rest of the Forth community to use locals either. Here is a quote from her:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hate locals :-)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now that I've told you that, do you think that it's odd?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 16:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nl6iel$avu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48661 |
On 7/1/2016 3:53 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 11:58:54 AM UTC-7, Julian Fondren wrote:
>> SwiftForth implements almost nothing from Forth-200x.
>> ...
>> Now that I've told you that, do you think that it's odd?
>
> Forth-200x is mandated to be 100% compatible with ANS-Forth. This means that no SwiftForth legacy code gets broken. It doesn't really matter what features get added to Forth-200x and do not get supported by SwiftForth, because SwiftForth will still be considered to be Forth-200x compliant --- if you write a Forth-200x program fails to work under SwiftForth, you will be blamed for writing a non-standard program --- this is the same as now with ANS-Forth; for example, if you write a program that assumes that the control-stack is distinct from the data-stack (legal in ANS-Forth) your program will not work under SwiftForth and you will get blamed for writing a non-standard program.
>
> The only "legacy code" that the Forth-200x committee cares about is SwiftForth legacy code. For about a quarter of a century, going back to a time prior to the existence of ANS-Forth, all the Forthers have used { to define local variables (the John Hopkins Format). There is a lot of legacy code that uses { for local variables. At Forth Inc. however, { is used for multi-line comments. Because of this, Forth-200x couldn't use { for defining locals and had to invent a new name {: instead. The breaks pretty much all of the Forth code that uses local, including ANS-Forth code, written in the last quarter of a century --- except for the SwiftForth code that continues to use { to define multi-line comments --- in SwiftForth version-2, (LOCAL) would crash the system when used; the fact that this bug got put in a production release indicates that nobody at Forth Inc. ever tested (LOCAL) at all, which indicates that there is no Forth Inc. legacy code that uses locals.
>
> Elizabeth Rather doesn't want to use locals, and she doesn't want the rest of the Forth community to use locals either. Here is a quote from her:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I hate locals :-)
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Now that I've told you that, do you think that it's odd?
Don't you guys get it? You are not dealing with a rational entity here.
It is sad since Hugh is obviously very intelligent and could be
capable of doing a lot with and for Forth. But his mental illness
prevents this from ever happening.
I don't know much about psychology really, but I know Hugh is clearly
off the tracks. I wonder if there is a medication that might help him?
I bet there is no way he could ever be convinced to get help though.
--
Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 19:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nl707j$os5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48663 |
On 7/1/2016 3:05 PM, rickman wrote:
> On 7/1/2016 3:53 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 11:58:54 AM UTC-7, Julian Fondren wrote:
>>> SwiftForth implements almost nothing from Forth-200x.
>>> ...
>>> Now that I've told you that, do you think that it's odd?
>>
>> Forth-200x is mandated to be 100% compatible with ANS-Forth. This
>> means that no SwiftForth legacy code gets broken. It doesn't really
>> matter what features get added to Forth-200x and do not get supported
>> by SwiftForth, because SwiftForth will still be considered to be
>> Forth-200x compliant --- if you write a Forth-200x program fails to
>> work under SwiftForth, you will be blamed for writing a non-standard
>> program --- this is the same as now with ANS-Forth; for example, if
>> you write a program that assumes that the control-stack is distinct
>> from the data-stack (legal in ANS-Forth) your program will not work
>> under SwiftForth and you will get blamed for writing a non-standard
>> program.
>>
>> The only "legacy code" that the Forth-200x committee cares about is
>> SwiftForth legacy code. For about a quarter of a century, going back
>> to a time prior to the existence of ANS-Forth, all the Forthers have
>> used { to define local variables (the John Hopkins Format). There is a
>> lot of legacy code that uses { for local variables. At Forth Inc.
>> however, { is used for multi-line comments. Because of this,
>> Forth-200x couldn't use { for defining locals and had to invent a new
>> name {: instead. The breaks pretty much all of the Forth code that
>> uses local, including ANS-Forth code, written in the last quarter of a
>> century --- except for the SwiftForth code that continues to use { to
>> define multi-line comments --- in SwiftForth version-2, (LOCAL) would
>> crash the system when used; the fact that this bug got put in a
>> production release indicates that nobody at Forth Inc. ever tested
>> (LOCAL) at all, which indicates that there is no Forth Inc. legacy
>> code that uses locals.
>>
>> Elizabeth Rather doesn't want to use locals, and she doesn't want the
>> rest of the Forth community to use locals either. Here is a quote from
>> her:
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> I hate locals :-)
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Now that I've told you that, do you think that it's odd?
>
> Don't you guys get it? You are not dealing with a rational entity here.
> It is sad since Hugh is obviously very intelligent and could be capable
> of doing a lot with and for Forth. But his mental illness prevents this
> from ever happening.
>
> I don't know much about psychology really, but I know Hugh is clearly
> off the tracks. I wonder if there is a medication that might help him?
> I bet there is no way he could ever be convinced to get help though.
>
So how about you explain what he said that is crazy? No free passes,
give the details.
--
Cecil - k5nwa
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 18:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4f522a11-969d-4667-aa5e-d73b38398e31@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #48666 |
On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 5:00:52 PM UTC-7, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: > On 7/1/2016 3:05 PM, rickman wrote: > > Don't you guys get it? You are not dealing with a rational entity here. > > It is sad since Hugh is obviously very intelligent and could be capable > > of doing a lot with and for Forth. But his mental illness prevents this > > from ever happening. > > > > I don't know much about psychology really, but I know Hugh is clearly > > off the tracks. I wonder if there is a medication that might help him? > > I bet there is no way he could ever be convinced to get help though. > > > So how about you explain what he said that is crazy? No free passes, > give the details. Rickman reminds me of the Dr. Greaver character in the movie: "Population 436." When any resident of Rockwell Falls express any criticism of the town, Dr. Greaver treats that person for "the fever" with electroshock therapy. If any resident attempt to leave the town, this is considered to be an advanced case of "the fever" and Dr. Greaver treats that person with a lobotomy. ANS-Forth is a cult! The only way that Forth programmers can appreciate ANS-Forth and consider Elizabeth Rather to be a "leading expert" on Forth, is if they are first given a lobotomy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 21:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nl7867$9qs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48669 |
On 7/1/2016 8:22 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 5:00:52 PM UTC-7, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: >> On 7/1/2016 3:05 PM, rickman wrote: >>> Don't you guys get it? You are not dealing with a rational entity here. >>> It is sad since Hugh is obviously very intelligent and could be capable >>> of doing a lot with and for Forth. But his mental illness prevents this >>> from ever happening. >>> >>> I don't know much about psychology really, but I know Hugh is clearly >>> off the tracks. I wonder if there is a medication that might help him? >>> I bet there is no way he could ever be convinced to get help though. >>> >> So how about you explain what he said that is crazy? No free passes, >> give the details. > > Rickman reminds me of the Dr. Greaver character in the movie: "Population 436." When any resident of Rockwell Falls express any criticism of the town, Dr. Greaver treats that person for "the fever" with electroshock therapy. If any resident attempt to leave the town, this is considered to be an advanced case of "the fever" and Dr. Greaver treats that person with a lobotomy. > > ANS-Forth is a cult! The only way that Forth programmers can appreciate ANS-Forth and consider Elizabeth Rather to be a "leading expert" on Forth, is if they are first given a lobotomy. > I have that movie, I would call that movie a mild horror movie, because weird and unnatural things happened to people that succeeded in leaving the town. And in that vein you must be crazy, no facts or information is needed, they will try to put you in the asylum or worst give you a lobotomy so be careful out there. This also could be called a horror comedy. -- Cecil - k5nwa
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wasell <from_usenet@wasell.eu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-02 13:04 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31e1bdffad1ea1e49896af@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #48669 |
On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:22:47 -0700 (PDT), in article <4f522a11-969d-4667-aa5e- d73b38398e31@googlegroups.com>, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 5:00:52 PM UTC-7, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: > > On 7/1/2016 3:05 PM, rickman wrote: [snip] > > > I don't know much about psychology really, but I know Hugh is clearly > > > off the tracks. I wonder if there is a medication that might help him? > > > I bet there is no way he could ever be convinced to get help though. > > > > > So how about you explain what he said that is crazy? No free passes, > > give the details. [snip] > ANS-Forth is a cult! The only way that Forth programmers can appreciate > ANS-Forth and consider Elizabeth Rather to be a "leading expert" on Forth, > is if they are first given a lobotomy. Does this answer your question, Cesil?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-02 09:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nl8jn8$avt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48689 |
On 7/2/2016 6:04 AM, Wasell wrote: > On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:22:47 -0700 (PDT), in article <4f522a11-969d-4667-aa5e- > d73b38398e31@googlegroups.com>, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >> >> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 5:00:52 PM UTC-7, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: >>> On 7/1/2016 3:05 PM, rickman wrote: > [snip] > >>>> I don't know much about psychology really, but I know Hugh is clearly >>>> off the tracks. I wonder if there is a medication that might help him? >>>> I bet there is no way he could ever be convinced to get help though. >>>> >>> So how about you explain what he said that is crazy? No free passes, >>> give the details. > [snip] > >> ANS-Forth is a cult! The only way that Forth programmers can appreciate >> ANS-Forth and consider Elizabeth Rather to be a "leading expert" on Forth, >> is if they are first given a lobotomy. > > Does this answer your question, Cesil? > My name is Cecil by the way. Just for fun I went back a bunch of years looking at this issue, what I saw did not endear me to many Forth greats here. I saw comments by Hugh, both rational and calm, followed by gross personal insults from others here that were personal assaults and not logical arguments on the subject, after a while he started down his present path of retaliating against those that kept personally insulting him. So I concluded that Hugh developed a massive dislike for some persons here based on how he was treated, so as far as I saw he has an excuse for his venting his anger at some here, I rather he did not but I see that there is a valid reason. It's an opinion that differs from yours, that is neither a crime nor a sign of insanity. That is unless you consider people with different opinions insane, which is the thing to do these days, specially with college kids, they fall apart if anyone offers a different opinion from theirs. Apparently freedom of speech only applies to their speech. How good would our German/Japanese be if kids their age behaved in their manner and refused to fight in WWW II because it hurt their feelings? This will not make friends for me here but I was appalled by what I read. -- Cecil - k5nwa
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alex McDonald <alex@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-02 16:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nl8mrn$ljb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48698 |
On 02/07/16 15:39, Cecil Bayona wrote: > On 7/2/2016 6:04 AM, Wasell wrote: >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:22:47 -0700 (PDT), in article >> <4f522a11-969d-4667-aa5e- >> d73b38398e31@googlegroups.com>, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 5:00:52 PM UTC-7, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: >>>> On 7/1/2016 3:05 PM, rickman wrote: >> [snip] >> >>>>> I don't know much about psychology really, but I know Hugh is clearly >>>>> off the tracks. I wonder if there is a medication that might help >>>>> him? >>>>> I bet there is no way he could ever be convinced to get help though. >>>>> >>>> So how about you explain what he said that is crazy? No free passes, >>>> give the details. >> [snip] >> >>> ANS-Forth is a cult! The only way that Forth programmers can appreciate >>> ANS-Forth and consider Elizabeth Rather to be a "leading expert" on >>> Forth, >>> is if they are first given a lobotomy. >> >> Does this answer your question, Cesil? >> > My name is Cecil by the way. > > Just for fun I went back a bunch of years looking at this issue, what > I saw did not endear me to many Forth greats here. I saw comments by > Hugh, both rational and calm, followed by gross personal insults from > others here that were personal assaults and not logical arguments on the > subject, after a while he started down his present path of retaliating > against those that kept personally insulting him. So I concluded that > Hugh developed a massive dislike for some persons here based on how he > was treated, so as far as I saw he has an excuse for his venting his > anger at some here, I rather he did not but I see that there is a valid > reason. You have evidence for this? It's a strange reading of what I've read and experienced. I've come in for some pretty unpleasant personal attacks over the years. If you like homophobia, Hugh's got some helpful advice. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.forth/w3tHPsTaZvE/zs_ag6dWIyEJ > > It's an opinion that differs from yours, that is neither a crime nor a > sign of insanity. That is unless you consider people with different > opinions insane, which is the thing to do these days, specially with > college kids, they fall apart if anyone offers a different opinion from > theirs. Apparently freedom of speech only applies to their speech. Hugh has a massive dislike of anyone that disagrees with him. He is, of course, entitled to his opinion and pet hates. But free speech gives him no entitlement to be heard, and he has been banned from other Forth communities for disruptive personal attacks. It is only because this is a public forum and unmoderated that he continues here. > > How good would our German/Japanese be if kids their age behaved in their > manner and refused to fight in WWW II because it hurt their feelings? What? > > This will not make friends for me here but I was appalled by what I read. > So am I. Why anyone would write that recognising Elizabeth Rather as a leading expert could only be done after a lobotomy is, to say the least, an unusual way of making a technical point about Forth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-02 11:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nl8rd4$552$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48704 |
On 7/2/2016 10:33 AM, Alex McDonald wrote: > On 02/07/16 15:39, Cecil Bayona wrote: >> On 7/2/2016 6:04 AM, Wasell wrote: >>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:22:47 -0700 (PDT), in article >>> <4f522a11-969d-4667-aa5e- >>> d73b38398e31@googlegroups.com>, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>>> >>>> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 5:00:52 PM UTC-7, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: >>>>> On 7/1/2016 3:05 PM, rickman wrote: >>> [snip] >>> >>>>>> I don't know much about psychology really, but I know Hugh is clearly >>>>>> off the tracks. I wonder if there is a medication that might help >>>>>> him? >>>>>> I bet there is no way he could ever be convinced to get help though. >>>>>> >>>>> So how about you explain what he said that is crazy? No free passes, >>>>> give the details. >>> [snip] >>> >>>> ANS-Forth is a cult! The only way that Forth programmers can appreciate >>>> ANS-Forth and consider Elizabeth Rather to be a "leading expert" on >>>> Forth, >>>> is if they are first given a lobotomy. >>> >>> Does this answer your question, Cesil? >>> >> My name is Cecil by the way. >> >> Just for fun I went back a bunch of years looking at this issue, what >> I saw did not endear me to many Forth greats here. I saw comments by >> Hugh, both rational and calm, followed by gross personal insults from >> others here that were personal assaults and not logical arguments on the >> subject, after a while he started down his present path of retaliating >> against those that kept personally insulting him. So I concluded that >> Hugh developed a massive dislike for some persons here based on how he >> was treated, so as far as I saw he has an excuse for his venting his >> anger at some here, I rather he did not but I see that there is a valid >> reason. > > You have evidence for this? It's a strange reading of what I've read and > experienced. I've come in for some pretty unpleasant personal attacks > over the years. > > If you like homophobia, Hugh's got some helpful advice. > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.forth/w3tHPsTaZvE/zs_ag6dWIyEJ > I would highly recommend to anyone before they pass harsh judgement on someone that they make sure that they are based on all the facts. As such I would recommend that you search through the archives yourself and see what the background is before passing harsh judgement. But if you are happy to pass judgement without all the facts, go for it then, soak in it until your fingers are all pruny. Homophobia? I am against all phobias but I make sure that it's there first, the accusation is not a fact. The post you pointed at shows Hugh complaining about vulgar language, and I see a bunch of people jumping to conclusions that were not supported by his comments. When one is looking for insults, it's not hard to find them even when they are not there. Anyway, I'm not Hugh defense attorney, but it seems a little uneven the comments I see, specially after looking at the past. Like I mentioned I wish Hugh would not retort in a personal way but I'm afraid he is a monster of his enemies creation. It's just like a dog, that gets beaten, after a while if it chooses to bite back, then the abuser says see, he is a violent dog. An interesting thing is that I see one person here with horrible anti Jew, and anti Catholic reotheric here, and not one comment about about it, choosy are we? >> >> It's an opinion that differs from yours, that is neither a crime nor a >> sign of insanity. That is unless you consider people with different >> opinions insane, which is the thing to do these days, specially with >> college kids, they fall apart if anyone offers a different opinion from >> theirs. Apparently freedom of speech only applies to their speech. > > Hugh has a massive dislike of anyone that disagrees with him. He is, of > course, entitled to his opinion and pet hates. But free speech gives him > no entitlement to be heard, and he has been banned from other Forth > communities for disruptive personal attacks. It is only because this is > a public forum and unmoderated that he continues here. > >> >> How good would our German/Japanese be if kids their age behaved in their >> manner and refused to fight in WWW II because it hurt their feelings? > > What? > >> >> This will not make friends for me here but I was appalled by what I read. >> > > So am I. Why anyone would write that recognising Elizabeth Rather as a > leading expert could only be done after a lobotomy is, to say the least, > an unusual way of making a technical point about Forth. > -- Cecil - k5nwa
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-02 10:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <598e18d4-ffae-4575-850b-fdcbc577d57b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #48706 |
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 11:50:45 AM UTC-5, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: > I would highly recommend to anyone before they pass harsh judgement on > someone that they make sure that they are based on all the facts. You're saying this to people who have conversed with and in the presence of Hugh since before Hugh himself showed up. I don't care about 'homophobia', but I at least get the reference to it. Maybe before you sign up as a permanent member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force, you might consider that the reason you're not seeing point-by-point rebuttals of Hugh's rants against Forth Inc and Forth 200x and ANS Forth is that we're all fucking tired of it and many of us are also unwilling to quote them and thereby make Hugh's targets more likely to read them. You're not the first person cry that we should "leave Hugh alone" when nearly every post of his is a renewed unprovoked attack on someone, or to try and beg that his targets engage him and thereby solve some pressing social issue. Hugh is mad. Bum mad. Ranting naked and throwing himself from buildings mad. If you have trouble grasping that, you should at least grasp that *we* all see him that way and that your various appeals are totally pointless. If you want to reply to the few non-toxic things Hugh says, go ahead. I do. Bear in mind that this will earn you a few blocks. But please give up as soon as possible on trying to change anyone's opinion about Hugh. > But if you > are happy to pass judgement without all the facts, go for it then, soak > in it until your fingers are all pruny. Great. You've given us permission to be "without the facts". Now go by your own word and cease to badger anyone about it. > > An interesting thing is that I see one person here with horrible anti > Jew, and anti Catholic reotheric here, and not one comment about about > it, choosy are we? > WJ? He's sort of a part-time member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force. He doesn't defend Hugh, but he joins in on Hugh's attacks sometimes. "Yeah, take *that*, ANS Forth!" He's also another person that people have attacked and then have gotten tired of attacking. But I'm sure that you search his post history you'll see that he's always innocently posting some code in another language, for our edification, and then people are cruelly attacking him for no reason! This is usenet. It's not moderated. Nobody here is posting with anyone's endorsement or approval. You can't actually block people on Google Groups, but you can sign up with endless september and use a real usenet client. On Andoid, you can get Terminux, install Emacs, and then use Gnus to connect to endless september. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-02 19:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nl9ieu$ohi$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48708 |
On 7/2/2016 1:45 PM, Julian Fondren wrote: > On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 11:50:45 AM UTC-5, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: >> I would highly recommend to anyone before they pass harsh judgement on >> someone that they make sure that they are based on all the facts. > > You're saying this to people who have conversed with and in the presence > of Hugh since before Hugh himself showed up. I don't care about > 'homophobia', but I at least get the reference to it. Maybe before you > sign up as a permanent member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force, you > might consider that the reason you're not seeing point-by-point > rebuttals of Hugh's rants against Forth Inc and Forth 200x and ANS Forth > is that we're all fucking tired of it and many of us are also unwilling > to quote them and thereby make Hugh's targets more likely to read them. > > You're not the first person cry that we should "leave Hugh alone" when > nearly every post of his is a renewed unprovoked attack on someone, or > to try and beg that his targets engage him and thereby solve some > pressing social issue. Hugh is mad. Bum mad. Ranting naked and > throwing himself from buildings mad. If you have trouble grasping that, > you should at least grasp that *we* all see him that way and that your > various appeals are totally pointless. > > If you want to reply to the few non-toxic things Hugh says, go ahead. I > do. Bear in mind that this will earn you a few blocks. But please give > up as soon as possible on trying to change anyone's opinion about Hugh. > >> But if you >> are happy to pass judgement without all the facts, go for it then, soak >> in it until your fingers are all pruny. > > Great. You've given us permission to be "without the facts". Now go by > your own word and cease to badger anyone about it. > >> >> An interesting thing is that I see one person here with horrible anti >> Jew, and anti Catholic reotheric here, and not one comment about about >> it, choosy are we? >> > > WJ? He's sort of a part-time member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force. > He doesn't defend Hugh, but he joins in on Hugh's attacks sometimes. > "Yeah, take *that*, ANS Forth!" Yeah, I didn't remember who that was, he can be very bizarre sometimes. Mostly he posts code in some other language as a challenge to Forthers. He does it without much discussion. At one point I thought maybe he was autistic. But he finally made some posts where he talks a bit and is clearly able to communicate when he chooses to. But then he spouts off his anti-semetic crap making it very clear he is also off his nut. How do people like that survive in the world... oh yeah, they drive cabs! Maybe WJ can keep it together enough to hold a programming job. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-03 11:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nlaqfm$ui1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48708 |
On 02/07/2016 18:45, Julian Fondren wrote: >Maybe before you > sign up as a permanent member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force, you > might consider that the reason you're not seeing point-by-point > rebuttals of Hugh's rants against Forth Inc and Forth 200x and ANS Forth > is that we're all fucking tired of it and many of us are also unwilling > to quote them and thereby make Hugh's targets more likely to read them. THat is true. Arguing with Hugh either leads to a never ending argument where we give up because it's a waste of time or abuse. Whenever Hugh's posts mention Elizabeth Rather, Anton Ertl etc I stop reading as a repetitive rant invariably follows. He does sometimes post some technical stuff that is worth reading so I haven't kill filed him like the other wasters like WJ and Vagino (currently aka endlessboomcapitalism) -- Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-03 07:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <29c0f812-3eb9-4e52-94e6-20393354b94b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #48745 |
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 3:47:19 AM UTC-7, Gerry wrote: > On 02/07/2016 18:45, Julian Fondren wrote: > >Maybe before you > > sign up as a permanent member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force, you > > might consider that the reason you're not seeing point-by-point > > rebuttals of Hugh's rants against Forth Inc and Forth 200x and ANS Forth > > is that we're all fucking tired of it and many of us are also unwilling > > to quote them and thereby make Hugh's targets more likely to read them. > > THat is true. Arguing with Hugh either leads to a never ending argument > where we give up because it's a waste of time or abuse. Whenever Hugh's > posts mention Elizabeth Rather, Anton Ertl etc I stop reading as a > repetitive rant invariably follows. He does sometimes post some > technical stuff that is worth reading so I haven't kill filed him like > the other wasters like WJ and Vagino (currently aka endlessboomcapitalism) > > -- > Gerry That guy (currently know as "endlessboomcapitalism") has the name: Gavino --- calling him "Vagino" is pretty vulgar, even by comp.lang.forth's low standards.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-03 11:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nlbc6c$mio$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48748 |
On 7/3/2016 10:08 AM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 3:47:19 AM UTC-7, Gerry wrote: >> On 02/07/2016 18:45, Julian Fondren wrote: >>> Maybe before you >>> sign up as a permanent member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force, you >>> might consider that the reason you're not seeing point-by-point >>> rebuttals of Hugh's rants against Forth Inc and Forth 200x and ANS Forth >>> is that we're all fucking tired of it and many of us are also unwilling >>> to quote them and thereby make Hugh's targets more likely to read them. >> >> THat is true. Arguing with Hugh either leads to a never ending argument >> where we give up because it's a waste of time or abuse. Whenever Hugh's >> posts mention Elizabeth Rather, Anton Ertl etc I stop reading as a >> repetitive rant invariably follows. He does sometimes post some >> technical stuff that is worth reading so I haven't kill filed him like >> the other wasters like WJ and Vagino (currently aka endlessboomcapitalism) >> >> -- >> Gerry > > That guy (currently know as "endlessboomcapitalism") has the name: Gavino --- calling him "Vagino" is pretty vulgar, even by comp.lang.forth's low standards. Lol! Calling someone "vulgar" is pretty significant coming from Hugh. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-04 08:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d84053dc-c6e6-4522-a11c-ee68d08ab6de@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #48745 |
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 3:47:19 AM UTC-7, Gerry wrote: > On 02/07/2016 18:45, Julian Fondren wrote: > >Maybe before you > > sign up as a permanent member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force, you > > might consider that the reason you're not seeing point-by-point > > rebuttals of Hugh's rants against Forth Inc and Forth 200x and ANS Forth > > is that we're all fucking tired of it and many of us are also unwilling > > to quote them and thereby make Hugh's targets more likely to read them. > > THat is true. Arguing with Hugh either leads to a never ending argument > where we give up because it's a waste of time or abuse. Whenever Hugh's > posts mention Elizabeth Rather, Anton Ertl etc I stop reading as a > repetitive rant invariably follows. You are criticizing me because I never give up when I know that I'm right. When has Elizabeth Rather ever backed down though? She has been arguing against general-purpose data-structures for 40 years now. No matter how many times the foolishness of this position is pointed out, she just stands her ground. Here is an example: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/Ts2pToYJO2A%5B76-100%5D Notice the recent date on this thread, despite the fact that this topic has been discussed repeatedly in the past decade that I've been on c.l.f.: On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 7:40:12 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 6/18/16 9:09 AM, lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 5:57:46 PM UTC+12, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> > >> On 6/18/16 2:28 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >>> > >>> On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 9:04:35 AM UTC+12, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >>> > >>>> But it's rarely used unchanged, because *this* application needed somewhat > >>>> different constraints, interface, units, ... and it was quick and easy > >>>> to pull something out of that back pocket and adapt it. Formal libraries > >>>> aren't that flexible. > >>> > >>> Isn’t that a criticism of the language, rather than the library concept? > >>> Because other languages can implement amazingly flexible libraries. > >>> > >> No, it's a testament to the flexibility of Forth. As someone else said, > >> it means that rather than adapt your program to the library, you can > >> select the specific features you need and have them operate exactly the > >> way you want, with great ease. > > > > So you never copy and paste code from one project to the next? You always start with a clean slate? > > Not at all. I start with useful code from the last project, take useful > functions, and modify it as necessary. Sometimes that's not at all, but > often there are tweaks needed. What I *don't* do is try to regard it as > a black box not to be touched, which seems to be the idea behind > "standard libraries". > > Cheers, > Elizabeth Also, btw, when have I ever abused you? Provide a link and a quotation from me in which I abused you or offended you. I don't recall ever arguing with you --- I had been thinking of you as being one of the few people on c.l.f. who know what general-purpose data-structures are. Cheers, or Aloha, or whatever!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-04 16:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fb018043-8a43-4cbe-8f91-bc1957932c53@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #48779 |
On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 1:08:36 PM UTC-7, Gerry wrote: > On 04/07/2016 16:25, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 3:47:19 AM UTC-7, Gerry wrote: > >> On 02/07/2016 18:45, Julian Fondren wrote: > >>> Maybe before you > >>> sign up as a permanent member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force, you > >>> might consider that the reason you're not seeing point-by-point > >>> rebuttals of Hugh's rants against Forth Inc and Forth 200x and ANS Forth > >>> is that we're all fucking tired of it and many of us are also unwilling > >>> to quote them and thereby make Hugh's targets more likely to read them. > >> > >> THat is true. Arguing with Hugh either leads to a never ending argument > >> where we give up because it's a waste of time or abuse. Whenever Hugh's > >> posts mention Elizabeth Rather, Anton Ertl etc I stop reading as a > >> repetitive rant invariably follows. > > > > You are criticizing me because I never give up when I know that I'm right. > > Not quite, I've had a few discussions with you where neither of us will > ever convince the other, rather than continue I give up to avoid wasting > my time - life's too short. So, this is why you said "That is true" when Julian Fondren described me as: "Bum mad. Ranting naked and throwing himself from buildings mad." Everybody who supports ANS-Forth is a brown-noser of Elizabeth Rather. ANS-Forth was just a marketing gimmick from Forth Inc. to convince the world that Forth Inc. sets the Standard (capital 'S') for Forth and that all Forthers in the entire world depend upon Forth Inc. and their self-proclaimed "leading expert" to tell them what to believe and to teach them how to program. So, if life's too short to waste your time, why do you spend your life brown-nosing Elizabeth Rather? All in all, I consider the ANS-Forth cult members to be craven cowards. You allowed an idiot sales-person to declare herself to be your leader, despite the fact that she (like every sales-person in the world) knows nothing about technical issues and has never written a computer program in her life. This is why Forth is a big failure! All of the ANS-Forth programmers are craven cowards --- not men at all! --- just sniveling losers who are willing to spend their lives brown-nosing a sales-person from a corporation that sells SwiftForth for over $400 that is full of bugs and then demands a $300 upgrade fee when the customers complain about the bugs. I will give Elizabeth Rather credit for being a great sales-person. Declaring that Forth Inc. sets the Standard for the entire Forth community was comparable to Harley Davidson declaring that their motorcycles set the standard for the entire biker community. The difference is that Harley Davidson tapped into the market of guys who want to posture as tough thugs despite being unable to fight with their fists, whereas Forth Inc. tapped into the market of guys who want to posture as computer programmers despite being unable to write computer programs. Elizabeth Rather has always surrounded herself with people like John Passaniti and Alex McDonald and Rickman --- you are able to program though --- so why do you want to be in her circle of sycophants? This RfD promotes the "quotations" that Bernd Paysan wrote the code for. Bernd Paysan was unwilling to put his name on the RfD however, presumably because he was ashamed of having faked the quotations (he knows as well as everybody else that quotations need to have access to the parent function's local variables). So, Alex McDonald put his name on the RfD. This was supposed to be a slam-dunk from a ladder for Alex McDonald as the RfD was pre-approved by Leon Wagner and was guaranteed to be accepted into Forth-200x. Then suddenly, at the height of his glory, Alex McDonald disappeared. For several months we didn't hear anything from him, but now suddenly he has reappeared again. Most likely he was in jail; that is the obvious explanation. Now Anton Ertl has taken over the RfD and won't give it back to Alex McDonald again. This looks stupid though --- Forth-200x represents itself as being a grass-roots project from the Forth community --- having the chair-person of the Forth-200x committee push the RfD through himself doesn't enhance this grass-roots image very well. So, since you are such a big fan of the RfD (you didn't complain about having your name listed as a contributor), why don't you volunteer to be listed as the author of the RfD? This would be a slam-dunk from a ladder for you! Go for the gold! In the Special Olympics of computer programming, everybody gets to be a winner!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-05 07:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nlfkp7$gnp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #48780 |
On 05/07/2016 00:57, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 1:08:36 PM UTC-7, Gerry wrote: >> On 04/07/2016 16:25, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 3:47:19 AM UTC-7, Gerry wrote: >>>> On 02/07/2016 18:45, Julian Fondren wrote: >>>>> Maybe before you >>>>> sign up as a permanent member of the Hugh Internet Defense Force, you >>>>> might consider that the reason you're not seeing point-by-point >>>>> rebuttals of Hugh's rants against Forth Inc and Forth 200x and ANS Forth >>>>> is that we're all fucking tired of it and many of us are also unwilling >>>>> to quote them and thereby make Hugh's targets more likely to read them. >>>> >>>> THat is true. Arguing with Hugh either leads to a never ending argument >>>> where we give up because it's a waste of time or abuse. Whenever Hugh's >>>> posts mention Elizabeth Rather, Anton Ertl etc I stop reading as a >>>> repetitive rant invariably follows. >>> >>> You are criticizing me because I never give up when I know that I'm right. >> >> Not quite, I've had a few discussions with you where neither of us will >> ever convince the other, rather than continue I give up to avoid wasting >> my time - life's too short. > > So, this is why you said "That is true" when Julian Fondren described me as: "Bum mad. Ranting naked and throwing himself from buildings mad." > I'm gobsmacked that you can state that. Where in my first post did those words appear? I quoted the bit that I said was true, that doesn't mean I agree with everything Julian Fondren wrote. > Everybody who supports ANS-Forth is a brown-noser of Elizabeth Rather. That's your definition. I doubt that anyone else agrees with it. Anyway there's quite a bit in ANS Forth I don't like - there I've said it, by your definition that must rule me out of her 'circle of sychophants'. There's also a lot that's good in ANS Forth - whoops does that rule me back in? > ANS-Forth was just a marketing gimmick from Forth Inc. to convince the world that Forth Inc. sets the Standard (capital 'S') for Forth and that all Forthers in the entire world depend upon Forth Inc. and their self-proclaimed "leading expert" to tell them what to believe and to teach them how to program. So, if life's too short to waste your time, why do you spend your life brown-nosing Elizabeth Rather? > > All in all, I consider the ANS-Forth cult members to be craven cowards. You allowed an idiot sales-person to declare herself to be your leader, despite the fact that she (like every sales-person in the world) knows nothing about technical issues and has never written a computer program in her life. This is why Forth is a big failure! All of the ANS-Forth programmers are craven cowards --- not men at all! > --- just sniveling losers who are willing to spend their lives brown-nosing a sales-person from a corporation that sells SwiftForth for over $400 that is full of bugs and then demands a $300 upgrade fee when the customers complain about the bugs. > > I will give Elizabeth Rather credit for being a great sales-person. Declaring that Forth Inc. sets the Standard for the entire Forth community was comparable to Harley Davidson declaring that their motorcycles set the standard for the entire biker community. The difference is that Harley Davidson tapped into the market of guys who want to posture as tough thugs despite being unable to fight with their fists, whereas Forth Inc. tapped into the market of guys who want to posture as computer programmers despite being unable to write computer programs. Elizabeth Rather has always surrounded herself with people like John Passaniti and Alex McDonald and Rickman --- you are able to program though --- so why do you want to be in her circle of sycophants? I'm not in *anyones* 'circle of sychophants'. > > This RfD promotes the "quotations" that Bernd Paysan wrote the code for. Bernd Paysan was unwilling to put his name on the RfD however, presumably because he was ashamed of having faked the quotations (he knows as well as everybody else that quotations need to have access to the parent function's local variables). So, Alex McDonald put his name on the RfD. This was supposed to be a slam-dunk from a ladder for Alex McDonald as the RfD was pre-approved by Leon Wagner and was guaranteed to be accepted into Forth-200x. Then suddenly, at the height of his glory, Alex McDonald disappeared. For several months we didn't hear anything from him, but now suddenly he has reappeared again. Most likely he was in jail; that is the obvious explanation. Now Anton Ertl has taken over the RfD and won't give it back to Alex McDonald again. This looks stupid though --- Forth-200x represents itself as being a grass-roots project from the Forth community --- having the chair-person of the Forth-200x com mittee push the RfD through himself doesn't enhance this grass-roots image very well. So, since you are such a big fan of the RfD (you didn't complain about having your name listed as a contributor), why don't you volunteer to be listed as the author of the RfD? This would be a slam-dunk from a ladder for you! Go for the gold! In the Special Olympics of computer programming, everybody gets to be a winner! > Don't you realise that your post proves the point I originally made. I politely replied to your last post and you responded with insults and repeated stuff you've written many times before. What upset you? Was it me reporting via email a couple of bugs in your string stack? -- Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 8 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web