Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #54064 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-01-17 12:17 +1100 |
| Last post | 2017-03-26 01:52 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 269 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-17 12:17 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-16 18:27 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 18:28 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-16 20:56 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-19 13:05 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 23:29 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-20 11:46 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-19 22:28 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 18:45 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-25 09:57 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2017-01-25 23:56 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-01-26 03:35 -0600
Re: EXIT THEN Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-01-26 11:31 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-26 11:07 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-05 19:15 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-07 17:54 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-02-07 21:14 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-13 16:52 +0000
Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-02-15 23:49 +0000
Re: Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-02-16 14:41 +0000
Re: Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-02-16 16:59 +0000
Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-11 15:05 +0000
Re: Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Matthias Trute <matthias.trute@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 12:37 -0700
Re: Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-13 21:32 +0000
Re: Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-14 04:42 -0500
Re: Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-14 11:45 +0000
Re: Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-14 12:41 +0000
Re: Recognizer using CATCH/THROW [was Re: EXIT THEN] albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-03-14 14:20 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:15 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-13 16:49 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-08 19:43 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-13 16:31 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-14 11:12 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-15 17:22 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-17 10:16 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2017-01-26 09:11 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-28 11:07 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-27 18:31 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-29 12:07 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-28 17:37 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 21:40 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-29 19:56 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 00:30 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-01-31 04:22 -0600
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-31 14:42 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-01-31 19:16 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-31 21:00 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-02-01 17:35 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 01:31 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-02-02 20:09 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-02 18:03 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 22:04 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 03:15 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-02-01 17:32 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-30 13:30 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 05:56 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-01-30 12:13 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-30 22:25 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-26 10:48 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2017-01-26 08:41 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-27 21:36 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-17 17:06 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-01-16 16:31 -1000
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-16 20:59 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 06:11 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-18 10:36 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-20 07:33 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-20 23:02 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-20 13:47 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-20 18:55 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-22 09:15 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 14:30 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 20:58 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-23 10:47 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 06:20 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-23 13:09 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 14:41 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-23 20:52 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 16:21 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-24 06:55 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 03:56 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-24 09:46 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-22 22:38 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-23 15:09 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-23 10:16 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 05:53 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2017-01-23 12:14 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 14:53 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-24 21:37 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 19:54 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-01-25 03:38 -0600
Re: EXIT THEN Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 08:01 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 10:27 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-17 11:34 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-18 14:35 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-18 10:37 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 20:53 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-01-17 18:02 -1000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 00:15 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-01-17 19:34 -1000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 03:33 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-01-18 03:45 -0600
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 14:43 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-01-18 13:17 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-19 13:46 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-18 13:56 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-19 13:04 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-01-18 18:10 -1000
Re: EXIT THEN Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-01-19 03:51 -0600
Re: EXIT THEN hheinrich.hohl@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 02:28 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-20 22:23 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-20 13:32 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-01-20 18:18 -1000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-23 12:00 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 21:10 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 01:22 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 06:03 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 02:27 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 04:00 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-24 07:49 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 20:04 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-24 20:23 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 21:32 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-01-24 23:04 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-25 00:45 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-25 07:16 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 02:57 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-25 16:55 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-01-25 09:53 -1000
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-01-26 22:40 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-26 10:55 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2017-01-26 10:17 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-27 13:09 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-26 21:54 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-01-27 14:12 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-28 12:32 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-29 10:35 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-22 21:35 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-01-23 04:15 -0600
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-01-23 10:29 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-23 21:48 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 06:18 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-26 11:34 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 22:04 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-01-25 17:22 -1000
Re: EXIT THEN Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-01-26 00:55 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-27 13:40 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-01-20 11:44 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-01-18 08:02 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 17:45 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-01-19 20:02 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 18:23 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-02-02 12:24 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-10 12:15 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN mhx@iae.nl - 2017-02-10 10:57 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-11 12:45 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-10 18:13 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-02-11 07:55 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-02-11 13:16 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-02-11 11:28 -1000
Re: EXIT THEN Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-11 13:40 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-11 18:52 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2017-02-12 12:09 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 07:24 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-02-12 16:42 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 13:52 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 00:02 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 21:27 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-13 07:53 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-12 16:25 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 17:11 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-12 18:49 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-12 18:59 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 21:18 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-12 14:39 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-11 18:47 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 00:49 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-11 23:07 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2017-02-12 12:36 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-13 11:08 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 17:04 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 17:08 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 17:24 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2017-02-17 16:32 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-19 10:47 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 16:07 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-19 13:54 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Heinrich Hohl <hheinrich.hohl@gmail.com> - 2017-02-17 02:40 -0800
Re: EXIT THEN Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-02-17 19:25 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-02-19 12:36 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 06:32 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2017-03-21 08:33 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-22 02:21 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 09:57 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 18:17 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 10:22 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-21 17:56 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 11:59 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-21 19:16 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 12:24 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-21 19:26 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 12:32 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-21 19:51 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 12:56 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-21 21:02 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 14:15 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-21 21:36 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 15:12 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 16:13 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 09:16 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 03:35 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 13:33 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-21 17:51 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-21 18:59 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 12:07 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 12:17 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-22 20:08 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 09:18 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-22 22:25 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 04:46 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 12:23 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 05:27 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 05:36 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-22 13:14 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 13:43 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 13:04 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 11:49 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 05:24 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 13:00 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 06:12 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 07:00 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 07:14 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 10:43 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 11:09 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 18:22 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 11:42 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 15:45 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 15:57 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 16:17 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 12:03 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-22 14:27 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 14:31 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-23 14:41 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 14:57 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-26 01:11 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 11:40 +0300
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-26 01:57 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-26 09:50 +0100
Re: EXIT THEN foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 09:14 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-23 00:48 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-22 13:59 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-23 09:52 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 16:13 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-23 14:39 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 16:33 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-24 14:17 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-24 11:49 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 18:12 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-24 08:55 +0000
Re: EXIT THEN Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-03-24 09:14 -0500
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-25 13:00 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-24 20:25 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 02:10 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-25 12:08 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 06:59 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-23 09:53 +1100
Re: EXIT THEN Helmar Wodtke <helmwo@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 07:52 -0700
Re: EXIT THEN "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2017-03-26 16:31 +1000
Re: EXIT THEN hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-26 01:52 -0700
Page 3 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 14 Next page →
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-28 21:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <o6jkk9$cbe$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54507 |
On 1/28/2017 8:37 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > All in all, putting Eaker's CASE in ANS-Forth in 1994 was a big blunder --- defending CASE in 2016 is cult behavior --- these are the hallmarks of cult behavior: > 1.) Continuing to defend mistakes after they have become obvious. > 2.) Belief that their cult leader is always right, even as this "leading expert" becomes increasingly arrogant and nonsensical over the years. > 3.) Attacking people who know better, or at least have different opinions. According to those definitions of cult behavior and how you interpret "mistakes" and "attacking" it is impossible to disagree with you on anything without it being cult behavior. I don't know why you consider a jump table to be so essential in a language. Perhaps rather than focusing on how evil ANS Forth and the case statement, perhaps you could make a reasonable proposal to add your <switch to the language and be prepared to discuss it critically without imagining you are being attacked by a cult? -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-29 19:56 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <18b39753-758c-4f06-8dd8-c50225d5eddc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54508 |
On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 7:40:48 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote: > On 1/28/2017 8:37 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > > > All in all, putting Eaker's CASE in ANS-Forth in 1994 was a big blunder --- defending CASE in 2016 is cult behavior --- these are the hallmarks of cult behavior: > > 1.) Continuing to defend mistakes after they have become obvious. > > 2.) Belief that their cult leader is always right, even as this "leading expert" becomes increasingly arrogant and nonsensical over the years. > > 3.) Attacking people who know better, or at least have different opinions. > > According to those definitions of cult behavior and how you interpret > "mistakes" and "attacking" it is impossible to disagree with you on > anything without it being cult behavior. > > I don't know why you consider a jump table to be so essential in a > language. Perhaps rather than focusing on how evil ANS Forth and the > case statement, perhaps you could make a reasonable proposal to add your > <switch to the language and be prepared to discuss it critically without > imagining you are being attacked by a cult? Ha! I've already seen this trick! Elizabeth Rather is a name-dropper. Her entire career is based upon claiming that various people who have accomplishments are her supporters. She listed both Charles Moore and Ray Duncan as her supporters in the ANS-Forth document in 1994. This is despite the fact that Charles Moore had been ignoring her since 1982 when he got kicked out of Forth Inc., and in 1993 Ray Duncan was on comp.lang.forth describing The ONLY ALSO scheme as "severely brain damaged." You are trying to induce me into writing an RfD for <SWITCH on Forth-200x solely for the purpose of making it possible for Elizabeth Rather to list my name in the Forth-200x document as a supporter. The gotcha here is that everybody who writes an RfD for Forth-200x implicitly agrees that Forth-200x is the "Standard" --- everybody who writes an RfD for Forth-200x sells their soul to Elizabeth Rather --- she will list them as a supporter forever after, and they can't do anything to stop her because they did in fact participate by writing an RfD for Forth-200x. I don't care about <SWITCH --- it only took me one day to write; it wasn't a brain buster --- it isn't very good because the table entries can't share local variables like in the C SWITCH construct. Only a total idiot would say: "I don't know why you consider a jump table to be so essential in a language." You don't know anything about algorithmics??? The CASE in ANS-Forth is just syntactic sugar for nested IF ELSE THEN constructs --- it is abundantly obvious that Elizabeth Rather doesn't know what a jump-table is, doesn't know C, and isn't capable of writing even the simplest code that I can write in one day --- she used Eaker's CASE because it was already available and this saved her from having to find somebody to write some code to implement a CASE construct. I wrote <SWITCH primarily for use in simulating a VM --- although it won't work well for a parallel system such as the Parallax Propeller because the table entries aren't re-entrant --- I also wrote <SWITCH just to make the ANS-Forth cult look stupid, as they are obliged to continue defending Eaker's CASE which is the ANS-Forth standard. As I said, way back in the early 1990s Testra had a switch construct that compiled into SCASW and was pretty fast. As far as I know, everybody had written something similar. All this talk about Eaker's CASE being "common practice" is nonsense --- it was common practice among imbeciles writing toy programs --- nobody who was serious at all about programming uses such a ridiculously inefficient construct; nobody cares that it won the contest in "Forth Dimensions" magazine. Every time that I write ANS-Forth code that works, this makes the ANS-Forth cult look stupid --- none of the ANS-Forth programmers can write code comparable to what I can write --- this is despite the fact that I'm not an ANS-Forth programmer and never will be.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-30 00:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <o6miuv$92l$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54533 |
On 1/29/2017 10:56 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 7:40:48 PM UTC-7, rickman wrote: >> On 1/28/2017 8:37 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> All in all, putting Eaker's CASE in ANS-Forth in 1994 was a big blunder --- defending CASE in 2016 is cult behavior --- these are the hallmarks of cult behavior: >>> 1.) Continuing to defend mistakes after they have become obvious. >>> 2.) Belief that their cult leader is always right, even as this "leading expert" becomes increasingly arrogant and nonsensical over the years. >>> 3.) Attacking people who know better, or at least have different opinions. >> >> According to those definitions of cult behavior and how you interpret >> "mistakes" and "attacking" it is impossible to disagree with you on >> anything without it being cult behavior. >> >> I don't know why you consider a jump table to be so essential in a >> language. Perhaps rather than focusing on how evil ANS Forth and the >> case statement, perhaps you could make a reasonable proposal to add your >> <switch to the language and be prepared to discuss it critically without >> imagining you are being attacked by a cult? > > Ha! I've already seen this trick! > > Elizabeth Rather is a name-dropper. Her entire career is based upon claiming that various people who have accomplishments are her supporters. She listed both Charles Moore and Ray Duncan as her supporters in the ANS-Forth document in 1994. This is despite the fact that Charles Moore had been ignoring her since 1982 when he got kicked out of Forth Inc., and in 1993 Ray Duncan was on comp.lang.forth describing The ONLY ALSO scheme as "severely brain damaged." > > You are trying to induce me into writing an RfD for <SWITCH on Forth-200x solely for the purpose of making it possible for Elizabeth Rather to list my name in the Forth-200x document as a supporter. The gotcha here is that everybody who writes an RfD for Forth-200x implicitly agrees that Forth-200x is the "Standard" --- everybody who writes an RfD for Forth-200x sells their soul to Elizabeth Rather --- she will list them as a supporter forever after, and they can't do anything to stop her because they did in fact participate by writing an RfD for Forth-200x. > > I don't care about <SWITCH --- it only took me one day to write; it wasn't a brain buster --- it isn't very good because the table entries can't share local variables like in the C SWITCH construct. > > Only a total idiot would say: "I don't know why you consider a jump table to be so essential in a language." You don't know anything about algorithmics??? The CASE in ANS-Forth is just syntactic sugar for nested IF ELSE THEN constructs --- it is abundantly obvious that Elizabeth Rather doesn't know what a jump-table is, doesn't know C, and isn't capable of writing even the simplest code that I can write in one day --- she used Eaker's CASE because it was already available and this saved her from having to find somebody to write some code to implement a CASE construct. > > I wrote <SWITCH primarily for use in simulating a VM --- although it won't work well for a parallel system such as the Parallax Propeller because the table entries aren't re-entrant --- I also wrote <SWITCH just to make the ANS-Forth cult look stupid, as they are obliged to continue defending Eaker's CASE which is the ANS-Forth standard. > > As I said, way back in the early 1990s Testra had a switch construct that compiled into SCASW and was pretty fast. As far as I know, everybody had written something similar. All this talk about Eaker's CASE being "common practice" is nonsense --- it was common practice among imbeciles writing toy programs --- nobody who was serious at all about programming uses such a ridiculously inefficient construct; nobody cares that it won the contest in "Forth Dimensions" magazine. > > Every time that I write ANS-Forth code that works, this makes the ANS-Forth cult look stupid --- none of the ANS-Forth programmers can write code comparable to what I can write --- this is despite the fact that I'm not an ANS-Forth programmer and never will be. Yes, I see you are slipping back into rant mode. I thought for a bit you were seriously interested in discussing Forth, but I see I was mistaken. Please don't post a manifesto. I'm not prepared for that. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-31 04:22 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <asGdnZ-6O8XH-A3FnZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #54534 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yes, I see you are slipping back into rant mode. I thought for a bit > you were seriously interested in discussing Forth, but I see I was > mistaken. Please don't post a manifesto. I'm not prepared for that. What is the point of quoting all that stuff? Please learn to trim. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-31 14:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ce47b668-325f-4ace-80ee-b70e979f4941@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54570 |
On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 3:22:23 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Yes, I see you are slipping back into rant mode. I thought for a bit > > you were seriously interested in discussing Forth, but I see I was > > mistaken. Please don't post a manifesto. I'm not prepared for that. > > What is the point of quoting all that stuff? Please learn to trim. > > Andrew. Andrew Haley is not capable of writing code such as my <SWITCH construct --- please learn to program...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-31 19:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <20170131191658.0ab3342f@_> |
| In reply to | #54581 |
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 14:42:50 -0800 (PST) hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 3:22:23 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: > > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Yes, I see you [Hugh] are slipping back into rant mode. I > > > thought for a bit you were seriously interested in discussing > > > Forth, but I see I was mistaken. Please don't post a manifesto. > > > I'm not prepared for that. > > > > > What is the point of quoting all that stuff? Please learn to trim. > > > > Andrew Haley is not capable of writing code such as my <SWITCH > construct --- please learn to program... Is that the measure of the man, whether he can code or not? Or, is the measure of a man whether what code he generously provides will be useful to someone else? Who exactly will use your <SWITCH construct? It's non-standard and there are other constructs which are widely available. Even you admitted, indirectly, that no one should use it: HA> "I don't care about <SWITCH --- it only took me one day to write; HA> it wasn't a brain buster --- it isn't very good because ..." So, folks, AISI, this is our summary: a) Hugh thinks he can code well, but he finds his own code to be rather worthless, which begs the question of whether or not he actually can. Is there a point to coding, if one can only produce bad code? b) Andrew is perceived by Hugh as not being able to code, but Hugh's opinion in this regard, given a), is likely to be worthless. Should the guy who admitted he writes crappy code be judging others? Wow, the stuff I see. Moving on, ... Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-31 21:00 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7c8fac28-6ad2-4b1e-9637-3305fd3a7b8a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54582 |
On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 5:16:13 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 14:42:50 -0800 (PST) > hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 3:22:23 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: > > > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Yes, I see you [Hugh] are slipping back into rant mode. I > > > > thought for a bit you were seriously interested in discussing > > > > Forth, but I see I was mistaken. Please don't post a manifesto. > > > > I'm not prepared for that. > > > > > > > What is the point of quoting all that stuff? Please learn to trim. > > > > > > > Andrew Haley is not capable of writing code such as my <SWITCH > > construct --- please learn to program... > > Is that the measure of the man, whether he can code or not? Or, is the > measure of a man whether what code he generously provides will be > useful to someone else? Who exactly will use your <SWITCH construct? > It's non-standard and there are other constructs which are widely > available. Even you admitted, indirectly, that no one should use it: You said that my <SWITCH construct is non-standard --- that is not true --- it was written in standard ANS-Forth. The reason why no ANS-Forth programmer will use <SWITCH is because doing so shines a spotlight on the stupidity of Eaker's CASE that Elizabeth Rather put in ANS-Forth. > HA> "I don't care about <SWITCH --- it only took me one day to write; > HA> it wasn't a brain buster --- it isn't very good because ..." > > So, folks, AISI, this is our summary: > > a) Hugh thinks he can code well, but he finds his own code to be rather > worthless, which begs the question of whether or not he actually can. > Is there a point to coding, if one can only produce bad code? What I said, which you snipped, was: On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 8:56:32 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > I don't care about <SWITCH --- it only took me one day to write; it wasn't a brain buster --- it isn't very good because the table entries can't share local variables like in the C SWITCH construct. The reason why <SWITCH has to generate a stand-alone colon word rather than be used inside of a colon word, and why the table entries can't share local variables like in the C SWITCH construct, is because ANS-Forth lacks quotations. Forth-200x also lacks quotations --- the Paysan-faked quotations aren't adequate because the quotations can't access the local variables in the parent function --- what are needed are real quotations that can access the parent function's local variables (so the table entries can share local variables) and which have an xt that is known at compile-time (unlike my rquotations that have a continuation that isn't known until run-time) so the table can be filled with these xt values. The failure of my <SWITCH to allow table entries to share local variables is not due to incompetence on my part, but rather it is due to the failure of ANS-Forth (and Forth-200x) to provide real quotations --- my <SWITCH is the best that can be obtained in ANS-Forth. > b) Andrew is perceived by Hugh as not being able to code, but Hugh's > opinion in this regard, given a), is likely to be worthless. Should > the guy who admitted he writes crappy code be judging others? My <SWITCH isn't "crappy code" --- there is no circumstance in which <SWITCH is less efficient than CASE (except perhaps the pathological circumstance in which there is only one table entry, which corresponds to a single IF ELSE THEN construct) --- roughly speaking, if there are N table entries, then <SWITCH is N/2 times faster than CASE --- if the programmer knows ahead of time which table entries are more likely, he can put them in the front, and this helps CASE slightly, but CASE still provides abysmal performance compared to <SWITCH which is consistently fast. I said that Andrew Haley is not capable of writing <SWITCH --- I didn't mean that he is incapable at a technical level (I also said that <SWITCH was not a brain-buster) --- I meant that he is incapable at a political level. Andrew Haley's background is that he worked at Forth Inc. and he taught the novice class when Elizabeth Rather wasn't able to teach it herself. Teaching this class requires him to say that ANS-Forth is perfect in every way --- he taught the students that CASE (which is just syntactic sugar for nested IF ELSE THEN constructs) is the best that Forth can do --- he had to ignore the eye-rolling from his students, and he had to ignore the fact that a jump-table is significantly more efficient (I assume that he did know this, as pretty much everybody with at least a year of programming experience knows this). In payment for Andrew Haley's loyalty, Elizabeth Rather appointed him to the Forth-200x committee. What I'm saying, is that the "the measure of a man" is honesty --- this is what Andrew Haley lacks --- he purposely misled the novice-class students (which only worked on students who didn't already know C or any other language that has a SWITCH that generates a jump-table), because he is a shameless brown-noser and his only desire was to please Elizabeth Rather. Eaker's CASE being in ANS-Forth makes the entire Forth community look stupid --- this is Elizabeth Rather's fault --- also the fault of her sycophants who continue to defend CASE for over two decades despite the fact that it is an obvious blunder.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-01 17:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <20170201173510.47748cee@_> |
| In reply to | #54584 |
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 21:00:17 -0800 (PST) hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > You said that my <SWITCH construct is non-standard --- that is not > true --- it was written in standard ANS-Forth. It is true. It's not in the ANS standard, i.e., non-standard. It is ANS compliant. > The reason why no ANS-Forth programmer will use <SWITCH is because > doing so shines a spotlight on the stupidity of Eaker's CASE that > Elizabeth Rather put in ANS-Forth. No, the reason why no ANS-Forth programmer or anyone else will use <SWTICH is because: 1) It's non-standard. It's simply not in the standard. 2) You admitted it sucks. 3) No one has an implementation of it. > What I said, which you snipped, was: I quoted the relevant part. You admitted it sucks implying that even you wouldn't use it. Why does "table entries" and "standalone colon definitions" matter in regards to it sucking? Irrelevant. > > b) Andrew is perceived by Hugh as not being able to code, but Hugh's > > opinion in this regard, given a), is likely to be worthless. Should > > the guy who admitted he writes crappy code be judging others? > > My <SWITCH isn't "crappy code" --- HA> "it isn't very good" Um, please make up your mind(s) ... It either is or it isn't. This is a binary choice, not a plurality of gray areas. > I said that Andrew Haley is not capable of writing <SWITCH --- I > didn't mean that he is incapable at a technical level ([...]) --- I > meant that he is incapable at a political level. What? ... > What I'm saying, is that the "the measure of a man" is honesty --- > this is what Andrew Haley lacks --- he purposely misled the > novice-class students (which only worked on students who didn't > already know C or any other language that has a SWITCH that generates > a jump-table), because he is a shameless brown-noser and his only > desire was to please Elizabeth Rather. ... > Eaker's CASE being in ANS-Forth makes the entire Forth community look > stupid --- this is Elizabeth Rather's fault --- also the fault of her > sycophants who continue to defend CASE for over two decades despite > the fact that it is an obvious blunder. So, there is no other reason than that? That's it? So, the ease of implementation of Eaker's CASE versus a jump table for interpreted Forth's was not a consideration for deciding to use nested IF ELSE THEN constructs instead of a jump table? Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-02 01:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <o6ujkk$56u$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54590 |
On 2/1/2017 5:35 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > So, there is no other reason than that? That's it? What do you think Hugh is like in person? Is he the sort that people stand away from on a subway platform? Does he talk to himself when shopping at the 7-11? I really wonder what he is like in real life. I looked for him on the web and found a wikipedia talk page where he was trying to get a link to his slide rule software included in the wiki slide rule page. The editors there were pretty patient with him and he was a lot more toned down than he is here, but the thinking was still paranoid and somewhat delusional. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-02 20:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <20170202200919.5d64c2b5@_> |
| In reply to | #54593 |
On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 01:31:24 -0500 rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/1/2017 5:35 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > So, there is no other reason than that? That's it? > > What do you think Hugh is like in person? Is he the sort that people > stand away from on a subway platform? Does he talk to himself when > shopping at the 7-11? I really wonder what he is like in real life. > > I looked for him on the web and found a wikipedia talk page where he > was trying to get a link to his slide rule software included in the > wiki slide rule page. The editors there were pretty patient with him > and he was a lot more toned down than he is here, but the thinking > was still paranoid and somewhat delusional. > Click the small picture at the first link for a big picture of Hugh. https://plus.google.com/101058669397421215660 http://linguoido.ning.com/profile/HughAguilar From his photo, I'd doubt he's so cranky IRL. He definitely doesn't look like a guy who would get arrested for defacing property ... From the name he put on the photo, his picture was taken at a Mexican restaurant, called "Comedor Guadalajara" in downtown Phoenix, AZ. From Google's street view, the photo was taken around 2014 as that is when the decorative green stone, open hours sign, and the "Dn Not Enter" traffic sign are all present at the rear (entrance) of the building. http://www.comedorguadalajara.com/ Well, the food looks good and is reasonably priced. Although I've gone into some really bad urban neighborhoods to get to work, restaurants, casinos, etc., or just regrettably passing through burned down neighborhoods infested with gangs or bikers, this area still appears somewhat rundown, industrial, and rather poor to me. Although it's far from the worst neighborhoods that I've seen, I'd still be rather cautious and discrete about entering into that area, especially at night, or without a group of people with me, since I'm not familiar with the locals. Google's street view has been in the area a half dozen times, and there are no images of police vehicles caught on any streets or side-streets in the area. Urban cops like restaurants with cheap food and will turn the cheapest places into their hang outs. So, even though they serve food inexpensively, the lack of visible police presence in area is a bad sign. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-02 18:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <cf56f766-7aff-45d2-aa04-8c397b6626d3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54601 |
On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 6:08:35 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote: > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 01:31:24 -0500 > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 2/1/2017 5:35 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > > > So, there is no other reason than that? That's it? > > > > What do you think Hugh is like in person? Is he the sort that people > > stand away from on a subway platform? Does he talk to himself when > > shopping at the 7-11? I really wonder what he is like in real life. > > > > I looked for him on the web and found a wikipedia talk page where he > > was trying to get a link to his slide rule software included in the > > wiki slide rule page. The editors there were pretty patient with him > > and he was a lot more toned down than he is here, but the thinking > > was still paranoid and somewhat delusional. > > > > Click the small picture at the first link for a big picture of Hugh. > > https://plus.google.com/101058669397421215660 > http://linguoido.ning.com/profile/HughAguilar > > From his photo, I'd doubt he's so cranky IRL. He definitely doesn't > look like a guy who would get arrested for defacing property ... > > From the name he put on the photo, his picture was taken at a Mexican > restaurant, called "Comedor Guadalajara" in downtown Phoenix, AZ. From > Google's street view, the photo was taken around 2014 as that is when > the decorative green stone, open hours sign, and the "Dn Not Enter" > traffic sign are all present at the rear (entrance) of the building. > > http://www.comedorguadalajara.com/ > > Well, the food looks good and is reasonably priced. > > Although I've gone into some really bad urban neighborhoods to get to > work, restaurants, casinos, etc., or just regrettably passing through > burned down neighborhoods infested with gangs or bikers, this area still > appears somewhat rundown, industrial, and rather poor to me. Although > it's far from the worst neighborhoods that I've seen, I'd still be > rather cautious and discrete about entering into that area, especially > at night, or without a group of people with me, since I'm not familiar > with the locals. Google's street view has been in the area a half > dozen times, and there are no images of police vehicles caught on any > streets or side-streets in the area. Urban cops like restaurants with > cheap food and will turn the cheapest places into their hang outs. So, > even though they serve food inexpensively, the lack of visible police > presence in area is a bad sign. > > > Rod Pemberton I mostly posted that <SWITCH code as a joke to make ANS-Forth with its CASE look foolish --- nobody actually writes programs in ANS-Forth --- all of the ANS-Forth "programmers" spend their time on comp.lang.forth and/or the Forth-200x mailing-list being big Forth experts. Now the joke is panning out --- I've got both Rickman and Rod Pemberton making fools of themselves --- all that is lacking is for Julien Fondren to make another death threat against me... Anyway, the joke is funnier the higher quality my code is --- so I have a slightly upgraded version now: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/6tDnHmi9pl0
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-02 22:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <o70rtj$3i6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54602 |
On 2/2/2017 9:03 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > I mostly posted that <SWITCH code as a joke to make ANS-Forth with > its CASE look foolish --- nobody actually writes programs in > ANS-Forth --- all of the ANS-Forth "programmers" spend their time on > comp.lang.forth and/or the Forth-200x mailing-list being big Forth > experts. > > Now the joke is panning out --- I've got both Rickman and Rod > Pemberton making fools of themselves --- I feel so humiliated. :( -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-01 03:15 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8e00f7f0-ebce-4aee-b844-8632b85531c2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54582 |
On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 00:16:13 UTC, Rod Pemberton wrote: <snipped> > Who exactly will use your <SWITCH construct? > It's non-standard and there are other constructs which are widely > available. <snipped> It's written in standard ANS Forth, so that claim is wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-01 17:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <20170201173232.7372d23a@_> |
| In reply to | #54586 |
On Wed, 1 Feb 2017 03:15:26 -0800 (PST) Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 00:16:13 UTC, Rod Pemberton wrote: > <snipped> > > Who exactly will use your <SWITCH construct? > > It's non-standard and there are other constructs which are widely > > available. > <snipped> > > It's written in standard ANS Forth, so that claim is wrong. No, it's not wrong. CASE is in the standard. <SWITCH is not. So, <SWITCH is non-standard. Is it ANS Forth compliant? Yes. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-30 13:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o6nf2r$2qt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54533 |
On 1/30/2017 03:56, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > You don't know anything about algorithmics??? Annie Lennox and Dave Stewart? Yeah, they were great, especially loved their "Sweet Dreams Are Made of This" album. -- Alex
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-30 05:56 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3ef5f739-5edc-456f-a1f3-1d6fe3c2b54a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54542 |
On Monday, 30 January 2017 13:30:43 UTC, Alex wrote: > On 1/30/2017 03:56, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > You don't know anything about algorithmics??? > > Annie Lennox and Dave Stewart? Yeah, they were great, especially loved > their "Sweet Dreams Are Made of This" album. > > -- > Alex Aye she's an Aberdeen quine!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-30 12:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <18539dd5-6bff-4a02-b65e-730ee3056b74@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54542 |
On Monday, 30 January 2017 14:30:43 UTC+1, Alex wrote: > On 1/30/2017 03:56, wrote: > > You don't know anything about algorithmics??? > > Annie Lennox and Dave Stewart? Yeah, they were great, especially loved > their "Sweet Dreams Are Made of This" album. > > -- > Alex Hi Alex, Did they change their name after Brexit? Euro* being too contentious??? Saw Annie Lennox in the Tourists supporting Roxy Music circa 197x - blew me away :-) Best regards, Howerd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-30 22:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o6oecn$ukr$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54553 |
On 1/30/2017 20:13, Howerd wrote: > On Monday, 30 January 2017 14:30:43 UTC+1, Alex wrote: >> On 1/30/2017 03:56, wrote: >>> You don't know anything about algorithmics??? >> >> Annie Lennox and Dave Stewart? Yeah, they were great, especially loved >> their "Sweet Dreams Are Made of This" album. >> >> -- >> Alex > > Hi Alex, > > Did they change their name after Brexit? Euro* being too contentious??? Nah. They haven't done anything together in a long time. > > Saw Annie Lennox in the Tourists supporting Roxy Music circa 197x - blew me away :-) Roxy. Now there's a blast from the past. > > Best regards, > Howerd > -- Alex
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-26 10:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o6ck24$nmv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #54410 |
On 26/01/2017 07:56, JennyB wrote: > I've just realised why OF isn't necessarily just a synonym of OVER = IF (that has bugged me for years). > > CASE can compile a jump table thus: > > OF checks if the selector if a constant > If is is, OF ... ENDOF compiles a quotation and remembers it and the selector > If the selector is the same as an existing constant it is ignored (the code is unreachable) That's not necessarily true, code can be executed between an ENDOF and the next OF such that a selector has the same value as a previous selector. > > Otherwise or at ENDCASE > It checks for existing selector/quotation pairs and compiles a suitable table. > -- Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-26 08:41 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ce666610-f40c-4aad-8529-9298fadd8308@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #54418 |
On Thursday, 26 January 2017 10:48:10 UTC, Gerry wrote: > On 26/01/2017 07:56, JennyB wrote: > > I've just realised why OF isn't necessarily just a synonym of OVER = IF (that has bugged me for years). > > > > CASE can compile a jump table thus: > > > > OF checks if the selector if a constant > > If is is, OF ... ENDOF compiles a quotation and remembers it and the selector > > If the selector is the same as an existing constant it is ignored (the code is unreachable) > > That's not necessarily true, code can be executed between an ENDOF and > the next OF such that a selector has the same value as a previous selector. > Yes, that's another case of Otherwise. > > > > Otherwise or at ENDCASE > > It checks for existing selector/quotation pairs and compiles a suitable table. > > Jump tables only work when there is nothing but a constant between OF ... ENDOF clauses. The point is that Eaker's CASE can accomodate either or a mixture of both in the same structure.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web