Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #53117 > unrolled thread
| Started by | josv@planet.nl |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-06 03:40 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-12-31 06:42 -0800 |
| Articles | 9 on this page of 149 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
f.) for Gorth josv@planet.nl - 2016-12-06 03:40 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-06 15:48 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-06 17:59 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth josv@planet.nl - 2016-12-06 13:17 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-07 11:11 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 06:11 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-07 17:50 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-07 15:23 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-08 16:18 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth josv@planet.nl - 2016-12-07 06:46 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-07 17:41 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-06 10:34 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth josv@planet.nl - 2016-12-09 12:11 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-23 13:23 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-15 15:42 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-07 13:06 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-06 18:32 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-07 12:41 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-07 19:49 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-12-08 08:12 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2016-12-08 18:53 -0500
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-09 00:01 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-09 12:17 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-09 13:01 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-09 11:19 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-08 22:23 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-09 07:11 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 22:40 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-20 23:59 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-21 21:17 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth The Beez <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 08:51 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-09 12:47 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-10 11:54 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-09 17:28 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-09 18:20 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-10 14:26 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth The Beez <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 09:14 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-13 19:24 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-14 07:29 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 18:29 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 10:13 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-15 03:45 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-15 10:42 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-15 05:11 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-15 12:36 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-15 07:33 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-15 14:31 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-15 14:34 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-15 16:20 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 16:46 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-17 09:23 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-19 02:56 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-16 08:10 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-16 10:00 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-18 10:32 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-19 03:22 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-16 14:14 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2016-12-19 19:41 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-20 03:02 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth mhx@iae.nl - 2016-12-20 01:27 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-20 12:35 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Charles Montgomery <cgm@physics.utoledo.edu> - 2016-12-20 21:23 -0500
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-21 07:29 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Charles Montgomery <cgm@physics.utoledo.edu> - 2016-12-21 22:24 -0500
Re: f.) for Gorth "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2016-12-22 08:10 -0500
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-22 17:39 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-15 12:53 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-15 05:59 -0600
Re: f.) for Gorth "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-01-03 16:15 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-14 17:06 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-18 10:58 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-17 17:26 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-19 13:16 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-18 19:19 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth john <anon@example.com> - 2016-12-19 11:03 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-12-20 01:46 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth john <anon@example.com> - 2016-12-20 12:14 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 17:34 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-18 19:25 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-18 19:45 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-22 11:32 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth Bernd Paysan <bernd@net2o.de> - 2017-01-03 19:33 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-03 22:13 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-04 23:03 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-06 22:52 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-07 22:45 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-07 17:23 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-08 09:13 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 17:10 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-09 10:22 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth stephen@mpeforth.com - 2017-01-08 07:00 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-05-20 14:09 +0200
Re: f.) for Gorth Matthias Trute <matthias.trute@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 01:14 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-07 12:26 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-08 10:21 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-20 15:45 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-20 15:33 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-22 11:37 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-22 14:19 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-23 12:11 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-22 17:49 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-23 20:41 +1100
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-05-20 14:21 +0200
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-15 22:31 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-16 18:26 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-18 16:41 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth stephen@mpeforth.com - 2016-12-20 02:20 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-12-20 13:04 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 17:27 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-17 10:36 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-17 11:51 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-18 19:35 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-19 14:17 +0100
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 10:10 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-19 20:33 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 18:11 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-19 19:03 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-12-20 08:10 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 18:05 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth - what is a number? Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2016-12-21 09:04 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-20 15:26 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-20 11:30 -0600
Language stds (was Re: f.) for Gorth) Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-20 19:49 +0000
Re: Language stds (was Re: f.) for Gorth) john <anon@example.com> - 2016-12-20 20:06 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 17:52 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-21 13:47 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-21 20:46 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-22 14:33 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-22 07:06 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 07:21 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-12-23 07:41 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-23 08:33 +0000
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-23 18:22 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 20:28 -0800
Re: f.) for Gorth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-26 18:30 -0800
Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-24 12:12 +1100
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-24 03:28 -0600
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-12-24 10:02 -0600
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-24 16:13 -0800
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-24 18:13 +0000
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-28 09:24 +1100
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-12-27 17:10 -0600
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 22:58 -0800
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-29 10:12 +1100
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-12-29 17:03 -0800
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-29 19:35 -0800
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-12-30 05:27 -0800
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-30 19:11 -0800
Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-31 06:42 -0800
Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
| From | "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-28 09:24 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <o3upnu$1ht$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #53521 |
Alex wrote: > ... > A small set of words and a reasonable level of skill don't build systems > that are interoperable; adhering to standards does that. Forth Inc with no standard was able to build in short order, systems, applications and a reputation with only skill and a modest set of tools. Standards in Forth are superfluous because there's nothing they can offer programmers that they couldn't already do outside a standard. That's the virtue of having a 'bottom up' language whose internals are exposed to the programmer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-27 17:10 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <Ov-dnbpeLP9Baf_FnZ2dnUU7-Y_NnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #53570 |
On 12/27/16 4:24 PM, HAA wrote: > Alex wrote: >> ... >> A small set of words and a reasonable level of skill don't build systems >> that are inter-operable; adhering to standards does that. > > Forth Inc with no standard was able to build in short order, systems, > applications and a reputation with only skill and a modest set of tools. > Standards in Forth are superfluous because there's nothing they can > offer programmers that they couldn't already do outside a standard. > That's the virtue of having a 'bottom up' language whose internals > are exposed to the programmer. Standards are superfluous the first time you build something, but starting in the late 70's in rapid order there were dozens of Forths all somewhat similar but extensively incompatible. The early efforts at standards (1977, 1978) barely scratched the surface. Interoperability requires a pretty broad base of commonality; that lesson was learned when Forth83 broke extensive amounts of code and created divisions in the Forth community some of which never healed. What standards offer a programmer is the ability to use SwiftForth, VFX, Win32Forth, and GForth without extensive re-education. Through the 90's I was able to teach Forth classes at Forth, Inc. using our systems; at Apple using GForth; and to customers of the Europay products produced by both MPE and FORTH, Inc. using the same set of slides, problem sets, and textbook. That is what a standard provides. Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth R. Conklin FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-27 22:58 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <4464e838-ef44-48fe-bd55-bda99858db42@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #53571 |
On Tuesday, December 27, 2016 at 4:10:27 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 12/27/16 4:24 PM, HAA wrote: > > Alex wrote: > >> ... > >> A small set of words and a reasonable level of skill don't build systems > >> that are inter-operable; adhering to standards does that. > > > > Forth Inc with no standard was able to build in short order, systems, > > applications and a reputation with only skill and a modest set of tools. > > Standards in Forth are superfluous because there's nothing they can > > offer programmers that they couldn't already do outside a standard. > > That's the virtue of having a 'bottom up' language whose internals > > are exposed to the programmer. > > Standards are superfluous the first time you build something, but > starting in the late 70's in rapid order there were dozens of Forths all > somewhat similar but extensively incompatible. The early efforts at > standards (1977, 1978) barely scratched the surface. Interoperability > requires a pretty broad base of commonality; that lesson was learned > when Forth83 broke extensive amounts of code and created divisions in > the Forth community some of which never healed. What standards offer a > programmer is the ability to use SwiftForth, VFX, Win32Forth, and GForth > without extensive re-education. Through the 90's I was able to teach > Forth classes at Forth, Inc. using our systems; at Apple using GForth; > and to customers of the Europay products produced by both MPE and FORTH, > Inc. using the same set of slides, problem sets, and textbook. That is > what a standard provides. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth No! You are saying that the purpose of a standard is to make programmers portable with without extensive re-education. That is not true. The purpose of a standard is to make programs portable. As a practical matter, ANS-Forth made Forth programmers migrate to C Nobody cares about your novice class at Forth Inc. --- you are teaching the students to use PAD etc., and are relying entirely on code snippets copied directly out of "Starting Forth" --- this is a kindergarten class that would require several cups of coffee for anybody with a 3-digit I.Q. to stay awake for the entire duration. This reminds me of how, at one job, I had to attend a class on how to use the copier --- some arrogant bitch from H.R. taught it, and talked down to us as if we were imbeciles --- she would say things like: "And, after you have all of your settings just right, you push the big green button!" Then I would ask a question such as: "Is that the big green button that says 'START' on it?" I was 19 years old at the time and something of a smart-aleck --- now I'm 19 years and several months old --- still a smart-aleck... BTW: It seems disingenuous for you to say that Forth-83 was a bad standard. You kicked Charles Moore out of Forth Inc. in 1982. So who are we supposed to blame for Forth-83 being a bad standard other than you? Also, Forth-83 wasn't all that bad --- FIND was not ambiguous, but it worked in an obvious straight-forward manner, and standard words were defined in Forth-83 as being immediate or non-immediate, rather than leaving this "implementation defined" which is a synonym for "ambiguous" --- the only problem with Forth-83 was that it assumed a 16-bit processor, but this was easy to work around (I had the constants W and D for the size of a word or double and my code routinely compiled and executed under either 16-bit or 32-bit UR/Forth without modification; Testra had a similar system; everybody had a similar system afaik).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-29 10:12 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <o41gs8$8in$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #53571 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 12/27/16 4:24 PM, HAA wrote: > > Alex wrote: > >> ... > >> A small set of words and a reasonable level of skill don't build systems > >> that are inter-operable; adhering to standards does that. > > > > Forth Inc with no standard was able to build in short order, systems, > > applications and a reputation with only skill and a modest set of tools. > > Standards in Forth are superfluous because there's nothing they can > > offer programmers that they couldn't already do outside a standard. > > That's the virtue of having a 'bottom up' language whose internals > > are exposed to the programmer. > > Standards are superfluous the first time you build something, but > starting in the late 70's in rapid order there were dozens of Forths all > somewhat similar but extensively incompatible. They still are and it makes no difference. Nobody writing a substantive application for SwiftForth expects the code to compile and run on VFX. > ... > What standards offer a > programmer is the ability to use SwiftForth, VFX, Win32Forth, and GForth > without extensive re-education. Through the 90's I was able to teach > Forth classes at Forth, Inc. using our systems; at Apple using GForth; > and to customers of the Europay products produced by both MPE and FORTH, > Inc. using the same set of slides, problem sets, and textbook. That is > what a standard provides. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth I don't know about that. Since when were standards about teaching forth and how do explain to students anomalies such as the changing ways of representing locals, support for idiosyncrasies peculiar to certain implementations and how it is SwiftForth doesn't have them? 'Forth' today is just as diverse, petty and obsessed with control as it was in the 1980's. That's what Forth standards reflect and there's nothing users can do about it other than say that's enough, I now make my own choices which will at least reflect my needs and experience and change them when circumspection dictates. And the beauty of Forth is that you can.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-29 17:03 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <ofednQd5PLIdL_jFnZ2dnUU7-LvNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #53594 |
On 12/28/16 3:12 PM, HAA wrote: > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 12/27/16 4:24 PM, HAA wrote: >>> Alex wrote: >>>> ... >>>> A small set of words and a reasonable level of skill don't build systems >>>> that are inter-operable; adhering to standards does that. >>> >>> Forth Inc with no standard was able to build in short order, systems, >>> applications and a reputation with only skill and a modest set of tools. >>> Standards in Forth are superfluous because there's nothing they can >>> offer programmers that they couldn't already do outside a standard. >>> That's the virtue of having a 'bottom up' language whose internals >>> are exposed to the programmer. >> >> Standards are superfluous the first time you build something, but >> starting in the late 70's in rapid order there were dozens of Forths all >> somewhat similar but extensively incompatible. > > They still are and it makes no difference. Nobody writing a substantive > application for SwiftForth expects the code to compile and run on VFX. Not the whole application, certainly, but consider the never-ending whine about libraries: the ability to write a bunch of functions (or even adapt a useful function from an adapted form used in an application) depends on standards. >> ... >> What standards offer a >> programmer is the ability to use SwiftForth, VFX, Win32Forth, and GForth >> without extensive re-education. Through the 90's I was able to teach >> Forth classes at Forth, Inc. using our systems; at Apple using GForth; >> and to customers of the Europay products produced by both MPE and FORTH, >> Inc. using the same set of slides, problem sets, and textbook. That is >> what a standard provides. >> >> Cheers, >> Elizabeth > > I don't know about that. Since when were standards about teaching > forth and how do explain to students anomalies such as the changing > ways of representing locals, support for idiosyncrasies peculiar to > certain implementations and how it is SwiftForth doesn't have them? > 'Forth' today is just as diverse, petty and obsessed with control as it > was in the 1980's. That's what Forth standards reflect and there's > nothing users can do about it other than say that's enough, I now make > my own choices which will at least reflect my needs and experience > and change them when circumspection dictates. And the beauty of > Forth is that you can. Standards have always been about teaching and enabling programmers to use multiple versions of a language without extensive retraining. "Programmer portability" is at least as important as code portability for a language to survive in the marketplace. I know people like Howerd Oakford who use FORTH, Inc. and MPE products, and a bunch of others who use FORTH, Inc. products and GForth. FORTH, Inc. gets (and always has, since the early 80's) regular inquiries from companies who are needing for whatever reason to port applications from another Forth to one of our products, and the ability to do so with a reasonable level of effort was radically improved with the advent of ANS Forth. Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth R. Conklin FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-29 19:35 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <1583bea8-6036-405d-ba4c-63dce1a97a2a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #53596 |
On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 6:04:07 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 12/28/16 3:12 PM, HAA wrote: > > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> On 12/27/16 4:24 PM, HAA wrote: > >>> Alex wrote: > >>>> ... > >>>> A small set of words and a reasonable level of skill don't build systems > >>>> that are inter-operable; adhering to standards does that. > >>> > >>> Forth Inc with no standard was able to build in short order, systems, > >>> applications and a reputation with only skill and a modest set of tools. > >>> Standards in Forth are superfluous because there's nothing they can > >>> offer programmers that they couldn't already do outside a standard. > >>> That's the virtue of having a 'bottom up' language whose internals > >>> are exposed to the programmer. > >> > >> Standards are superfluous the first time you build something, but > >> starting in the late 70's in rapid order there were dozens of Forths all > >> somewhat similar but extensively incompatible. > > > > They still are and it makes no difference. Nobody writing a substantive > > application for SwiftForth expects the code to compile and run on VFX. > > Not the whole application, certainly, but consider the never-ending > whine about libraries: the ability to write a bunch of functions (or > even adapt a useful function from an adapted form used in an > application) depends on standards. Code-libraries depend upon having a standard that works --- not ambiguous, such that all the "compliant" compilers contradict each other because they all interpret the ambiguous requirements differently --- ANS-Forth killed Forth, primarily because it failed to support code-libraries Your use of the word "whine" is offensive --- bitch! > >> What standards offer a > >> programmer is the ability to use SwiftForth, VFX, Win32Forth, and GForth > >> without extensive re-education. Through the 90's I was able to teach > >> Forth classes at Forth, Inc. using our systems; at Apple using GForth; > >> and to customers of the Europay products produced by both MPE and FORTH, > >> Inc. using the same set of slides, problem sets, and textbook. That is > >> what a standard provides. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Elizabeth > > > > I don't know about that. Since when were standards about teaching > > forth and how do explain to students anomalies such as the changing > > ways of representing locals, support for idiosyncrasies peculiar to > > certain implementations and how it is SwiftForth doesn't have them? > > 'Forth' today is just as diverse, petty and obsessed with control as it > > was in the 1980's. That's what Forth standards reflect and there's > > nothing users can do about it other than say that's enough, I now make > > my own choices which will at least reflect my needs and experience > > and change them when circumspection dictates. And the beauty of > > Forth is that you can. > > Standards have always been about teaching and enabling programmers to > use multiple versions of a language without extensive retraining. > "Programmer portability" is at least as important as code portability > for a language to survive in the marketplace. I know people like Howerd > Oakford who use FORTH, Inc. and MPE products, and a bunch of others who > use FORTH, Inc. products and GForth. FORTH, Inc. gets (and always has, > since the early 80's) regular inquiries from companies who are needing > for whatever reason to port applications from another Forth to one of > our products, and the ability to do so with a reasonable level of effort > was radically improved with the advent of ANS Forth. This is just your fantasy --- ANS-Forth would "enable" (require) the programmers to migrate from UR/Forth to PolyForth --- what actually happened is that the majority of Forth programmers migrated to C. Also, I doubt that there is any "Howard Oakford" --- you are a pathological liar --- you make this stuff up!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-30 05:27 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <647c8f68-233c-423f-beef-3e0e5543fcf2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #53596 |
On Friday, 30 December 2016 02:04:07 UTC+1, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 12/28/16 3:12 PM, HAA wrote: > > Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> On 12/27/16 4:24 PM, HAA wrote: > >>> Alex wrote: > >>>> ... > >>>> A small set of words and a reasonable level of skill don't build systems > >>>> that are inter-operable; adhering to standards does that. > >>> > >>> Forth Inc with no standard was able to build in short order, systems, > >>> applications and a reputation with only skill and a modest set of tools. > >>> Standards in Forth are superfluous because there's nothing they can > >>> offer programmers that they couldn't already do outside a standard. > >>> That's the virtue of having a 'bottom up' language whose internals > >>> are exposed to the programmer. > >> > >> Standards are superfluous the first time you build something, but > >> starting in the late 70's in rapid order there were dozens of Forths all > >> somewhat similar but extensively incompatible. > > > > They still are and it makes no difference. Nobody writing a substantive > > application for SwiftForth expects the code to compile and run on VFX. > > Not the whole application, certainly, but consider the never-ending > whine about libraries: the ability to write a bunch of functions (or > even adapt a useful function from an adapted form used in an > application) depends on standards. > > >> ... > >> What standards offer a > >> programmer is the ability to use SwiftForth, VFX, Win32Forth, and GForth > >> without extensive re-education. Through the 90's I was able to teach > >> Forth classes at Forth, Inc. using our systems; at Apple using GForth; > >> and to customers of the Europay products produced by both MPE and FORTH, > >> Inc. using the same set of slides, problem sets, and textbook. That is > >> what a standard provides. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Elizabeth > > > > I don't know about that. Since when were standards about teaching > > forth and how do explain to students anomalies such as the changing > > ways of representing locals, support for idiosyncrasies peculiar to > > certain implementations and how it is SwiftForth doesn't have them? > > 'Forth' today is just as diverse, petty and obsessed with control as it > > was in the 1980's. That's what Forth standards reflect and there's > > nothing users can do about it other than say that's enough, I now make > > my own choices which will at least reflect my needs and experience > > and change them when circumspection dictates. And the beauty of > > Forth is that you can. > > Standards have always been about teaching and enabling programmers to > use multiple versions of a language without extensive retraining. > "Programmer portability" is at least as important as code portability > for a language to survive in the marketplace. I know people like Howerd > Oakford who use FORTH, Inc. and MPE products, and a bunch of others who > use FORTH, Inc. products and GForth. FORTH, Inc. gets (and always has, > since the early 80's) regular inquiries from companies who are needing > for whatever reason to port applications from another Forth to one of > our products, and the ability to do so with a reasonable level of effort > was radically improved with the advent of ANS Forth. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth > > -- > Elizabeth R. Conklin > FORTH, Inc. > 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 > Los Angeles, CA 90045 > USA Hello Elizabeth, I recently published an update to my Windows Socket API code for SwiftForth, VFX Forth and Win32Forth, and this would not have been possible without a common standard that they all adhere to. I think that the ANSI/ISO Forth standard is a good thing, because it saves me time and effort. Describing the Windows Sockets API is difficult enough, and taming the menagerie of RFCs that define internet protocols is a never-ending battle, without having to work out what INVERT , NOT or 0= is doing in each system (to give one example). I do not believe that the existence of a Forth Standard prevents or hinders new development. At the moment I am spending some free time on my You-Me Drive project ( you-me.one ), and I am designing yet another Forth, which being heavily influenced by colorForth is unlikely to be ANS Forth compatible. e.g. the parameter stack is 8 items of 256 bytes each, so it also serves as a string and big number stack. As for whether the current ANS Forth standard is "right" or "finished" - of course it's not - that's why there is a review process. As for whether the review process is "right" - I think that it is as good as it can be - given the lack of major corporate funding. Its a real grass roots effort, as everything to do with Forth should be. There will always be boring people in the world, who find enjoyment in tearing down other peoples' work or reputations, and there will always be people who are deceived by hype and misinformation. But in a moment of optimism I also like to think that there are still people out there who consider Computer Science as a branch of Science, who have a respect for objective truth, and an understanding that we can never achieve this ideal. Just my 2 €cents worth, Einen guten Rutsch ins neue Jahr! As they say here in Germany :-) Howerd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-30 19:11 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <8437493f-e594-4f2e-86c1-718d2fe3f6db@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #53607 |
On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 6:27:22 AM UTC-7, Howerd wrote:
> On Friday, 30 December 2016 02:04:07 UTC+1, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> > Standards have always been about teaching and enabling programmers to
> > use multiple versions of a language without extensive retraining.
> > "Programmer portability" is at least as important as code portability
> > for a language to survive in the marketplace. I know people like Howerd
> > Oakford who use FORTH, Inc. and MPE products, and a bunch of others who
> > use FORTH, Inc. products and GForth. FORTH, Inc. gets (and always has,
> > since the early 80's) regular inquiries from companies who are needing
> > for whatever reason to port applications from another Forth to one of
> > our products, and the ability to do so with a reasonable level of effort
> > was radically improved with the advent of ANS Forth.
> > ...
> Hello Elizabeth,
>
> I recently published an update to my Windows Socket API code for SwiftForth, VFX Forth and Win32Forth, and this would not have been possible without a common standard that they all adhere to.
> I think that the ANSI/ISO Forth standard is a good thing, because it saves me time and effort. Describing the Windows Sockets API is difficult enough, and taming the menagerie of RFCs that define internet protocols is a never-ending battle, without having to work out what INVERT , NOT or 0= is doing in each system (to give one example).
So you are the "Howard Oakford" that she trotted out for us?
Elizabeth Rather is a name-dropper. She also listed Ray Duncan and Charles Moore, the two major luminaries of Forth, in her ANS-Forth document. This is despite the fact that neither of them supported her. ANSI doesn't know anything about Forth --- they only rubber-stamped ANS-Forth because it had Charles Moore's name listed --- she pulled the wool over their eyes.
The only purpose of the Forth-200x mailing list is so she can collect names of Forth programmers and list them in the document as supporters. I have strongly opposed the Paysan-faked quotations, and I have provided code for my rquotations that actually works --- yet, the Forth-200x committee has continually listed my name as a contributor on the Paysan-faked quotation RfD. I threaten a libel lawsuit to make them remove my name, but they continued to list me as a supporter, then when I threatened the lawsuit again Anton Ertl finally removed my name. They may yet put my name back in their list of sycophants --- they can argue that because I was on the mailing list at least for a while that I did "contribute" to the Paysan-faked quotations --- realistically, I can't afford an attorney to stop them.
Why would you allow her to use your name? Is your integrity that cheap?
> I do not believe that the existence of a Forth Standard prevents or hinders new development.
This is a straw-man argument. I don't say that a Forth Standard prevents or hinders new development --- I say that a good Forth Standard is crucial for new development --- now would be a good time to start work on that!
> As for whether the review process is "right" - I think that it is as good as it can be - given the lack of major corporate funding. Its a real grass roots effort, as everything to do with Forth should be.
LOL That was stupid!
The Forth-200x committee is packed by Forth Inc.. Andrew Haley is a Forth Inc. employee and a total brown-noser of Elizabeth Rather. Stephen Pelc brags about doing "joint projects" with Forth Inc., and he totally kowtows to Leon Wagner (for example, changing the name of { to {: because SwiftForth uses { for multi-line comments, despite the fact that everybody including himself has used John Hopkins format for locals since prior to ANS-Forth). Peter Knaggs is an employee of Stephen Pelc. AFAIK, every member of the Forth-200x committee is a stooge of Forth Inc.
This is not a "real grass roots effort" --- you are not being honest --- everybody knows that ANS-Forth and Forth-200x are both marketing gimmicks of Forth Inc..
> There will always be boring people in the world, who find enjoyment in tearing down other peoples' work or reputations, and there will always be people who are deceived by hype and misinformation.
> But in a moment of optimism I also like to think that there are still people out there who consider Computer Science as a branch of Science, who have a respect for objective truth, and an understanding that we can never achieve this ideal.
This is what Elizabeth Rather said on the Forth-200x in her effort to get me kicked out:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hugh has been hanging around c.l.f for several years, now. He originally
got mad at FORTH, Inc. because we insisted on charging for an upgrade to
SwiftForth 3.0 for people who had bought 2.x > a year earlier. He has
had one programming job, paying $10/hr, on which he wrote a
cross-compiler for a microcontroller for a project. He was fired at the
end of the project, and has since been working as a taxicab driver. He
is actively homophobic, and developed his hatred for me when I called
him on a particularly vitriolic attack on a c.l.f poster who dared to
mention his partner. Pretty much everyone on c.l.f has his number.
Hope you are doing well. Ned and i are enjoying life in Hawaii, and hope
you are, too!
Aloha,
Elizabeth
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
She is lying. I didn't get fired from Testra.
Her lies aren't even realistic. How would she know any of this? The owners at Testra can't stand her either and aren't talking to her.
She made a sales-pitch at Testra to write the cross-compiler but got turned down because her price was "exorbitant." Also, Testra was unimpressed that Forth Inc. sent a glib sales-person to talk to them, rather than a programmer --- she didn't understand the technical issues at all --- she was just selling Forth Inc. on the old pitch that she learned directly from Charles Moore in the 1970s and hence is the "leading expert" on Forth forever. Testra hired me instead. The project was a success. She has never forgiven me for this --- most likely, Testra was the only company in the 20th century that was building a Forth processor --- this is other than Charles Moore himself, but she obviously can't work for him as they have split up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-31 06:42 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Language stds (Re: f.) for Gorth) |
| Message-ID | <1287be35-8a33-4c95-b2d1-0cc2f14760fd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #53635 |
On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 8:11:19 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> The only purpose of the Forth-200x mailing list is so she can collect names of Forth programmers and list them in the document as supporters. I have strongly opposed the Paysan-faked quotations, and I have provided code for my rquotations that actually works --- yet, the Forth-200x committee has continually listed my name as a contributor on the Paysan-faked quotation RfD. I threaten a libel lawsuit to make them remove my name, but they continued to list me as a supporter, then when I threatened the lawsuit again Anton Ertl finally removed my name. They may yet put my name back in their list of sycophants --- they can argue that because I was on the mailing list at least for a while that I did "contribute" to the Paysan-faked quotations --- realistically, I can't afford an attorney to stop them.
>
> Why would you allow her to use your name? Is your integrity that cheap?
Some more history here. It was Alex McDonald who wrote the RfD for the Paysan-faked quotations. Bernd Paysan couldn't write the RfD himself because he is a Forth-200x committee member. They are trying to fake up a grassroots image, so they don't want the committee members themselves to write the RfDs --- they want a mailing-list member to write the RfDs so that they appear to come from the "Forth community." This is totally fake, of course, because Bernd Paysan had already written the fake-quotation code and Anton Ertl had already supported it, before the RfD was even written. Alex McDonald isn't actually capable of writing code himself, but he was allowed to put his name on the RfD as a reward for his loyalty (for example: he had recently told me that I have a "serious misunderstanding of how pointers work" and "really don't understand how CREATE DOES> works"). Alex McDonald listed my name as a contributor to the fake quotation RfD despite the fact that I have strongly opposed the fake quotations and said that Forth needs real quotations (quotations that have access to the parent function's local variables) --- this was a big part of why I left Forth-200x --- I am strongly opposed to fakery and dishonesty, and I just didn't want to associate with Bernd Paysan anymore. I said that I would sue for libel if they continued to list my name as a contributor to the fake quotations.
Recently, Anton Ertl took the fake-quotation RfD away from Alex McDonald and put his own name on it. Normally the committee members never put their own names on the RfDs, because they are faking up a grassroots image, so they always find a stooge to put his name on the RfD instead. Apparently Anton Ertl was so anxious to get the RfD pushed through that he broke this rule and just put his own name on it.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/ohE8mx7tWQU%5B1-25%5D
Notice that he is listing my name as a contributor. Once again, I threatened a libel lawsuit if they continued to list my name as one of their sycophants; this time Anton Ertl removed my name. Notice also that I provided code to implement rquotations that do have access to the parent function's local variables. This isn't ANS-Forth, but I did write it for both VFX and SwiftForth, and I think that it would be trivial to write for any ANS-Forth compiler. This is my code:
On Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 9:23:44 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> \ in the stack-picture comments, R is a continuation (a vector to a quotation)
>
> VFX? SwiftForth? or [if]
>
> \ My code ( VFX or SwiftForth only) requires that the HOF does have local variables.
>
> : rexit ( -- ) rdrop ;
> : (r:) ( -- r ) r@ 5 + ; \ 5 is the size of a JMP instruction in 32-bit x86
> : r[ ( -- r ) postpone (r:) postpone ahead ; immediate
> : ]r ( -- ) postpone rexit postpone then ; immediate
>
> VFX? [if]
>
> code rex ( r -- ) \ HumptyDumpty called this RCALL
> push edi \ this is the HOF's LF which won't be used by the quotation
> mov edi, 0 [edi] \ this is the parent's LF which will be used by the quotation
> mov eax, ebx
> mov ebx, 0 [ebp] lea ebp, w [ebp]
> call eax
> pop edi \ restore HOF's LF
> next, end-code
>
> [then]
>
> SwiftForth? [if]
>
> 156 constant lf-offset \ this is the offset for the local-frame in the user-variables (ESI is the user-variable base)
>
> code rex ( r -- ) \ HumptyDumpty called this RCALL
> lf-offset [esi] edx mov
> edx push \ this is the HOF's LF which won't be used by the quotation
> -4 [edx] eax mov \ this is the old ESP
> 0 [eax] eax mov \ this is the parent's LF which will be used by the quotation
> eax lf-offset [esi] mov
> ebx eax mov [drop]
> eax call
> lf-offset [esi] pop \ restore HOF's LF
> ret end-code
>
> [then]
>
> [else] \ this was written by HumptyDumpty and works on gForth, SwiftForth and VFX
>
> : rexit ( -- ) RDROP ;
> : (r:) ( -- r ) R@ 0 ;
> : r[ ( -- r ) postpone (r:) postpone IF ; immediate
> : ]r ( -- ) postpone REXIT postpone THEN ; immediate
> : rex ( r -- ) >R -1 ; \ HumptyDumpty called this RCALL
>
> \ HumptyDumpty's code requires that the HOF does not have local variables.
>
> [then]
I totally made the Forth-200x committee look like idiots! They had said that it was impossible for a quotation to have access to the parent function's local variables, and I provided code that did this. That killed the RfD --- it is in limbo now --- I blocked this RfD, despite the fact that it was supported by the committee members Bernd Paysan and Anton Ertl and was supposed to be a slam-dunk from a ladder.
Now consider this thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/92KNs8p4J6Y
We have this post:
On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 3:31:09 AM UTC-7, Alex wrote:
> On 12/30/2016 22:38, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >
> > BTW: How many ANS-Forth programmers know that this is not ANS-Forth?
> >
> > 2e
> >
> > The ANS-Forth Standard only allows 'E' to be used and not 'e' ---
> > almost all ANS-Forth programs use literal floats with 'e' though ---
> > so, none of them are actually ANS-Forth programs.
> >
>
> Correct. But that's standards for you; don't follow them at your peril.
> I'd support a change to the text interpreter to recognise { D | d | E |
> e } as in >FLOAT. Would you like to propose this change?
>
>
> --
> Alex
How bizarre is this??? Alex McDonald is asking me if I want to propose a change --- write an RfD for Forth-200x --- this is despite the fact that I left Forth-200x and slammed the door behind me.
Notice that in this thread I wrote an early-binding version of MACRO: --- if I do say so myself, this is pretty awesome code --- this is comparable to my rquotations in awesomeness!
The proposal that Alex McDonald is suggesting is trivial. Any Forth programmer with at least one week of experience could write this RfD. Also, the RfD is guaranteed to be accepted. Leon Wagner decides if an RfD is accepted or not, and these are his criteria:
1.) Implementing the code must take less than 10 minutes of his time.
2.) Documenting it must take only one or two sentences and should be understandable by anybody with one week of Forth experience.
3.) It must not have any affect whatsoever on existing SwiftForth code, or on possible future SwiftForth code that is written according to typical Forth Inc. style.
The proposal that Alex McDonald is suggesting that I put my name on, fits all of these criteria, so it is pretty much guaranteed to be accepted by Leon Wagner.
If I put my name on this proposal however, then I have essentially sold my soul to Leon Wagner. I won't be able to complain when they list my name as a "contributor" because I did in fact contribute an RfD and got it accepted. The Forth-200x committee will have bought my soul and paid me essentially nothing --- they can spend the rest of forever telling the world that I am one of their little sycophants --- they will totally own me!
Since you seem to be enthusiastic about being a part of Forth-200x, why don't you put your name on this proposal? Imagine how proud you will be when "your" RfD gets accepted and becomes a part of Forth-200x! You will be able to tell the world that you are such a brilliant Forth programmer that you help to write the standard --- as compared to wanna-be Forth programmers such as myself who are unable to make any contribution and who depend entirely upon geniuses such as yourself for guidance.
Even better, why don't you put your name on the fake-quotation RfD? Anton Ertl needs another stooge to put his name on the RfD because he no longer wants Alex McDonald's name on it (because Alex McDonald is too dumb, even by Forth-200x's low standards). You have both Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan supporting the fake quotations --- just ignore the fact that I wrote actual working code --- tell everybody that actual working code is impossible and hence that a fake non-working solution is necessary.
Yes, Howerd, you too can get an RfD accepted! --- become world famous as a big Forth expert, then look down your nose at mere Forth programmers such as myself! --- sell your soul in exchange for fame!
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web