Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #56541 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-01 12:10 -0400 |
| Last post | 2017-04-08 01:37 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 202 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 12:10 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-01 17:06 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 16:37 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 19:21 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 17:16 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:26 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:51 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 18:50 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 19:18 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:29 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 22:01 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-02 21:46 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:54 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-02 22:26 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 08:34 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-01 18:47 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:28 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 04:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-02 15:44 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:56 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:16 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:38 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 16:42 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-08 12:41 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 17:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 22:03 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 01:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-01 22:56 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:32 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:45 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:03 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:31 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:35 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:37 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 19:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 12:58 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:06 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-03 10:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 01:21 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2017-04-02 13:58 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 11:16 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 19:38 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-02 22:10 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-02 22:02 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-02 15:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 23:48 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 23:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 10:23 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-03 15:56 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-03 20:57 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-03 08:08 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-02 19:22 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 22:46 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 20:38 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 07:07 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 00:17 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 07:41 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 20:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 00:15 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 21:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-04 02:08 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 03:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-04 06:25 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 20:19 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 17:33 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-08 18:45 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 19:03 +0000
Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 08:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? joel.rees@gmail.com - 2017-04-06 03:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 15:46 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-07 18:59 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:57 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:37 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:31 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:45 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-07 20:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:31 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 06:18 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? mhx@iae.nl - 2017-04-08 03:01 -0700
Starting Forth (was: Is there a free version ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 12:34 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 15:53 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 09:36 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-07 20:30 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 17:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 01:22 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 23:01 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-08 23:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 17:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 18:18 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 23:05 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 03:11 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-09 12:24 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 14:16 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 13:50 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-10 06:19 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-10 11:20 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 18:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 19:42 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-11 15:26 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 10:24 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:42 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 11:28 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 07:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 14:30 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 16:53 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-09 14:44 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-09 08:19 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 00:26 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 21:39 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 07:47 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-09 21:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:18 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-10 11:41 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-10 07:57 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 12:27 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 15:57 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2017-04-11 13:24 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-12 01:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 23:37 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 16:59 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 17:49 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:32 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 12:09 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 12:18 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 15:54 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 01:47 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:39 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 02:33 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? mhx@iae.nl - 2017-04-11 04:12 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:14 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:02 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:24 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:09 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 21:37 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 15:59 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? john <anon@example.com> - 2017-04-12 17:12 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:19 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:54 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 21:12 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:19 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 00:27 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:32 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:49 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 21:37 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:53 +0300
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:25 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:27 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:52 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:53 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 03:51 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 00:22 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-04-13 15:59 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:07 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:58 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 02:54 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 18:29 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 07:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 08:04 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2017-04-09 23:23 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:00 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-10 09:21 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:49 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-10 10:26 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 03:10 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same wordsas "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-04-13 20:55 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-07 12:41 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 20:48 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 14:03 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-07 21:21 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-04-08 03:28 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 02:39 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 12:45 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 00:26 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 14:38 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:20 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-07 16:17 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-04-08 12:49 +0100
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 01:01 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 10:06 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-09 19:37 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 16:09 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 17:26 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? minforth@arcor.de - 2017-04-09 22:32 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 22:44 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 18:47 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-10 12:31 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-10 10:18 -1000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 16:14 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 18:11 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-11 03:21 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:02 -0700
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-12 04:42 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 13:51 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-08 14:04 +0000
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-04-08 09:10 +0200
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-08 12:50 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 21:31 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2017-04-07 20:50 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 22:04 -0400
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2017-04-07 21:22 -0500
Re: Is there a free version of Forth that uses the exact same words as "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 01:37 -0400
Page 10 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 Next page →
| From | albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 19:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ocdrh5$gqi$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #56938 |
In article <1d320a99-b667-400c-8548-64e1b9f686f4@googlegroups.com>, <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: <SNIP> >The truth is that Charles Moore walked out on ANS-Forth in 1989 and never l= >ooked back. In 1994 the ANS-Forth document was rubber-stamped by ANSI becau= >se it had Charles Moore's name listed as a supporter. In 1997 the first-eve= >r ANS-Forth compiler was written (Forth Inc. hired Rick van Norman to write= > SwiftForth) and it was too bug-ridden to be usable until version-3 came ou= >t several years later. At the time I worked in a team with Marcel Hendrix on the transputer Forth. Not only had Marcel a running Forth before we had the transputer hardware, (he wrote an emulator), tforth followed the developments closely and at the moment the standard became official there was a fully working and debugged Forth that followed its preliminary standard. Then within days rather than weeks, we had a fully tested, fully documented tforth, compliant with the standard. So this is another of your ill-informed statements. P.S. this is not to say that tForth was the only compliant Forth before 1997, just one I can testify about. <SNIP> Groetjes Albert > -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 16:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d8b97c22-00a4-4e22-b3ac-3a741c1cf44e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56941 |
On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 10:37:27 AM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article <1d320a99-b667-400c-8548-64e1b9f686f4@googlegroups.com>,
> <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote:
> <SNIP>
> >The truth is that Charles Moore walked out on ANS-Forth in 1989 and never l=
> >ooked back. In 1994 the ANS-Forth document was rubber-stamped by ANSI becau=
> >se it had Charles Moore's name listed as a supporter. In 1997 the first-eve=
> >r ANS-Forth compiler was written (Forth Inc. hired Rick van Norman to write=
> > SwiftForth) and it was too bug-ridden to be usable until version-3 came ou=
> >t several years later.
>
> At the time I worked in a team with Marcel Hendrix on the transputer Forth.
> Not only had Marcel a running Forth before we had the transputer hardware,
> (he wrote an emulator), tforth followed the developments closely and
> at the moment the standard became official there was a fully working
> and debugged Forth that followed its preliminary standard.
> Then within days rather than weeks, we had a fully tested,
> fully documented tforth, compliant with the standard.
>
> So this is another of your ill-informed statements.
>
> P.S. this is not to say that tForth was the only compliant Forth before
> 1997, just one I can testify about.
You testify about a lot of things. For example:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.lang.forth/LC53%7Csort:relevance/comp.lang.forth/qqlp1gZnVic/kjeAwWCaR1MJ
Albert van der Horst wrote:
> It sounds like you have a whole machinery in place to tests rng's.
> Would you mind adding LC53 to the list?
>
> \ Comma for clarity, not a double number.
> : LC53 -5 um* -333,333,333 + nip ;
This is LC53:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
4294967291 constant rnd-unity \ 2^32 - 5
3961633963 constant rnd-mult \ 2^32 - 333333333
macro: <prng> ( rnd -- new-rnd )
rnd-mult um* rnd-unity um/mod drop ;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was not an isolated case either. You repeatedly presented non-working code which you claimed was my LC53, but your lies were caught every time.
I don't believe anything you say. You're a liar.
If Darin, or anybody else, wants to see your true colors, all they have to do is read that thread.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 17:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b65f2e9a-7180-4854-a688-ccbbf183baf3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56950 |
On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 4:09:58 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 10:37:27 AM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote: > You testify about a lot of things. For example: > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.lang.forth/LC53%7Csort:relevance/comp.lang.forth/qqlp1gZnVic/kjeAwWCaR1MJ > > Albert van der Horst wrote: > > It sounds like you have a whole machinery in place to tests rng's. > > Would you mind adding LC53 to the list? > > > > \ Comma for clarity, not a double number. > > : LC53 -5 um* -333,333,333 + nip ; > > This is LC53: > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 4294967291 constant rnd-unity \ 2^32 - 5 > 3961633963 constant rnd-mult \ 2^32 - 333333333 > > macro: <prng> ( rnd -- new-rnd ) > rnd-mult um* rnd-unity um/mod drop ; > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This was not an isolated case either. You repeatedly presented non-working code which you claimed was my LC53, but your lies were caught every time. > > I don't believe anything you say. You're a liar. > > If Darin, or anybody else, wants to see your true colors, all they have to do is read that thread. Here is another example of you lying, from the same thread: On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 at 8:37:56 AM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote: > The way to find a primitive root is basically trial and error, > and that is what Hugh did. > Or at least that is what I expected him to do... > > But 333,333,333 is not a p.r. You always make a slight change in the hope that nobody will notice. In both cases, Bernd Paysan noticed --- normally he is leading the charge in attacking my code --- apparently such blatant lying is too much even for him to stomach (and considering how he openly consorted with John Passaniti, he has a pretty strong stomach).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | minforth@arcor.de |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 22:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9f1bae65-b885-428b-ab32-a82352f84e56@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56941 |
Am Sonntag, 9. April 2017 19:37:27 UTC+2 schrieb Albert van der Horst: > In article <1d320a99-b667-400c-8548-64e1b9f686f4@googlegroups.com>, > <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: > <SNIP> > >The truth is that Charles Moore walked out on ANS-Forth in 1989 and never l= > >ooked back. In 1994 the ANS-Forth document was rubber-stamped by ANSI becau= > >se it had Charles Moore's name listed as a supporter. In 1997 the first-eve= > >r ANS-Forth compiler was written (Forth Inc. hired Rick van Norman to write= > > SwiftForth) and it was too bug-ridden to be usable until version-3 came ou= > >t several years later. > > At the time I worked in a team with Marcel Hendrix on the transputer Forth. > Not only had Marcel a running Forth before we had the transputer hardware, > (he wrote an emulator), tforth followed the developments closely and > at the moment the standard became official there was a fully working > and debugged Forth that followed its preliminary standard. > Then within days rather than weeks, we had a fully tested, > fully documented tforth, compliant with the standard. > > So this is another of your ill-informed statements. > > P.S. this is not to say that tForth was the only compliant Forth before > 1997, just one I can testify about. > > <SNIP> > > Groetjes Albert > > > -- > Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS > Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. > albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst We had a compatible MinForth up and running as soon as we had a dpANS in hand. I published the test version years later that ran on DOS and Windows NT. The real version targeted a PLC CPU.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-09 22:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6b9ad3ad-3098-4ea8-abcf-142f6780f7ed@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #56973 |
On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 10:32:01 PM UTC-7, minf...@arcor.de wrote: > Am Sonntag, 9. April 2017 19:37:27 UTC+2 schrieb Albert van der Horst: > > In article <1d320a99-b667-400c-8548-64e1b9f686f4@googlegroups.com>, > > <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: > > <SNIP> > > >The truth is that Charles Moore walked out on ANS-Forth in 1989 and never l= > > >ooked back. In 1994 the ANS-Forth document was rubber-stamped by ANSI becau= > > >se it had Charles Moore's name listed as a supporter. In 1997 the first-eve= > > >r ANS-Forth compiler was written (Forth Inc. hired Rick van Norman to write= > > > SwiftForth) and it was too bug-ridden to be usable until version-3 came ou= > > >t several years later. > > > > At the time I worked in a team with Marcel Hendrix on the transputer Forth. > > Not only had Marcel a running Forth before we had the transputer hardware, > > (he wrote an emulator), tforth followed the developments closely and > > at the moment the standard became official there was a fully working > > and debugged Forth that followed its preliminary standard. > > Then within days rather than weeks, we had a fully tested, > > fully documented tforth, compliant with the standard. > > > > So this is another of your ill-informed statements. > > > > P.S. this is not to say that tForth was the only compliant Forth before > > 1997, just one I can testify about. > > > > <SNIP> > > > > Groetjes Albert > > > > > -- > > Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS > > Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. > > albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst > > We had a compatible MinForth up and running as soon as we had a dpANS in hand. > > I published the test version years later that ran on DOS and Windows NT. The real version targeted a PLC CPU. ANS-Forth was all about compromise. Everybody involved got to claim to be ANS-Forth compliant, in exchange for supporting ANS-Forth as the standard, even if their systems were incompatible. This is why ANS-Forth is ambiguous throughout. Most likely you just brown-nosed Elizabeth Rather --- agreed that she could be the "leading expert" --- in exchange she said that your system was ANS-Forth compliant. Also, your story is very dubious. The term is PLD (programmable logic device) not PLC (programmable logic controller) --- a PLD is what the MiniForth at Testra was built on (the Lattice isp1048 PLD) --- a PLC is a device used to control industrial equipment, programmed with ladder-diagrams, and typically built on an 8051 (that is why the 8051 has those 32 1-bit variables). You don't have your terminology correct --- I think you're just making this stuff up! You are the same guy who posted my code on comp.lang.forth with my name removed from the copyright notice: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/wP5nw1ClzsM%5B1-25%5D Later on you admitted that you didn't know what the algorithm did.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 18:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <grQGA.832274$F83.29373@fx38.am4> |
| In reply to | #56938 |
hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > Who told you that Elizabeth Rather was one of Forth's original developers? > > This is what she says about herself: > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Elizabeth Rather is the co-founder of FORTH, Inc. and is a leading expert in the Forth programming language. Elizabeth was a colleague of Chuck Moore when he worked at NRAO in the early 1970s. During his development of Forth, she became the second ever Forth programmer. Since then, she has become a leading expert in the language and one of its main proponents. Elizabeth was the chair of the ANSI Technical Committee that produced the ANSI Standard for Forth (1994). She is an author of several books on Forth and gave many training seminars on its usage. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Does this support your statement that she developed Forth? Does she seem to be rather dodgy in regard to claiming any actual accomplishments of her own? > >> I do the same for Mr. Moore too, because he was the inventor >> of Forth. > > I agree on this. All of the ANS-Forth cult members refer to Charles Moore as "Chuck" as if they are best buddies. > > The truth is that Charles Moore walked out on ANS-Forth in 1989 and never looked back. In 1994 the ANS-Forth document was rubber-stamped by ANSI because it had Charles Moore's name listed as a supporter. In 1997 the first-ever ANS-Forth compiler was written (Forth Inc. hired Rick van Norman to write SwiftForth) and it was too bug-ridden to be usable until version-3 came out several years later. > > Charles Moore has no involvement in ANS-Forth, and there are multiple quotes from him indicating that he doesn't consider ANS-Forth to be Forth at all. So, calling him "Chuck" and pretending that he is a supporter is just salesmanship. I very much doubt that Charles Moore has ever heard of any of the Forth-200x committee members, or cares in the slightest about their silly committee and their claim that they lead the whole Forth community. The committee members were appointed by Elizabeth Rather, and Charles Moore hasn't had any contact with her since the 1980s --- she has made a career out of bragging about her association with him, but he has never bragged about his association with her --- she is just a parasite that won't go away. > > This reminds me of when I was working as a cab-driver and passengers would often try to impress me by pretending to be best buddies with some celebrity because they had met the celebrity once --- there was never any evidence that the celebrity knew who they were or cared --- this was always a red flag for me that the passenger was going to try to run without paying, because people like that are psychopaths (maybe not full-fledged psychopaths like Ted Bundy, but sociopaths who make a lame attempt at being charming before they run). Hugh, from my nearly a year of research I have run across many different published sources online, that confirm that Mrs. Conklin/Rather experience working with Mr. Moore and her help in developing ANSI Forth. As such I pay her the courtesy she does deserve, That being said, I, like yourself and Mr. Moore have my reservations about the ANSI Standard, mainly because I believe while Standards are good in Business jargon sense (Sales Confidence) they do not make a bloated and development environment worth buying. I learned that lesson working in the IT Industry for over 20 years, supporting the worse bloated and buggy crap from Windows, OSX and UNIX, Office, LIBRE, etc., that the software industry has rushed to release. Also my experience with buggy, bloated, games that too are often rushed, ill development and released with more bugs than code. I understand why a Forth Standard was attempted, because the community was divided and the software industry wouldn't accept FORTH seriously/commercially without it, but how much has these two issues which brought about the ANSI Forth Standard has really been improved? Now, since Forth is so "behind the scenes" as everyone keeps expressing, it makes it very difficult to determine. If anyone has any tangible evidence (i.e., websites, statistical data, testimonies from outside Forth's community, etc.,), I'd sure like to see it, because so far my research shows the ANSI Standard only polarized the community even more so and the Software Industry considers at it's best a embedded only language or at its worse a cryptic difficult to read toy language. Now that being said, I for one love Forth because it's small, simple, easy to understand, from what I've researched can be modified to be as fast as C, and can be modified/changed to solve any programming/computable problem! Once I am finished studying Forth and Assembly again, I'll have all the tools i'll ever need developing software period. Take care now, Darin Murphy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 12:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87lgr86ovj.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #57011 |
Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> writes: > Once I am finished studying Forth and Assembly again, I'll have all > the tools i'll ever need developing software period. Understanding Forth and Assembly will make anyone a better programmer, but unless your development goals are very limited, you probably ought to take a wider view. As one of the Bards once sung, programming in assembler is "kinda like construction work, with a toothpick for a tool".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 10:18 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <hL-dnRTwOasUdXbFnZ2dnUU7-VvNnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #57011 |
On 4/10/17 8:47 AM, Darin Murphy wrote: > That being said, I, like yourself and Mr. Moore have my reservations > about the ANSI Standard, mainly because I believe while Standards are > good in Business jargon sense (Sales Confidence) they do not make a > bloated and development environment worth buying. I learned that > lesson working in the IT Industry for over 20 years, supporting the > worse bloated and buggy crap from Windows, OSX and UNIX, Office, > LIBRE, etc., that the software industry has rushed to release. Also my > experience with buggy, bloated, games that too are often rushed, ill > development and released with more bugs than code. I understand why a > Forth Standard was attempted, because the community was divided and > the software industry wouldn't accept FORTH seriously/commercially > without it, but how much has these two issues which brought about the > ANSI Forth Standard has really been improved? Now, since Forth is so > "behind the scenes" as everyone keeps expressing, it makes it very > difficult to determine. If anyone has any tangible evidence (i.e., > websites, statistical data, testimonies from outside Forth's community, > etc.,), I'd sure like to see it, because so far my research shows the > ANSI Standard only polarized the community even more so and the Software > Industry considers at it's best a embedded only language or at its worse > a cryptic difficult to read toy language. All standards are controversial within their communities. Some new standards for other languages have generated multi-million $$ law suits. Many of the controversies in the C community spill over here, as some current threads here demonstrate. But, looking back, ANS Forth has brought a lot more unity of Forth practice than existed before, making it a lot easier for Forth programmers to move between different implementations and even helping clarify some of the discussions here. Fortunately, it has not resulted in much "bloat" because it is not necessary to support most of the added wordsets if they are not relevant to the kinds of projects one has in mind. > Now that being said, I for one love Forth because it's small, simple, > easy to understand, from what I've researched can be modified to be as > fast as C, and can be modified/changed to solve any > programming/computable problem! Once I am finished studying Forth and > Assembly again, I'll have all the tools i'll ever need developing > software period. Take care now, "Small, simple, easy to understand" remain hallmarks of Forth for all practitioners, although individuals differ on what features are "essential". Cheers, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth D. Rather FORTH, Inc. 6080 Center Drive, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90045 USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 16:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <73983fed-0041-457e-b114-1256c6b80c7e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57015 |
On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 1:18:22 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > But, looking back, ANS Forth has > brought a lot more unity of Forth practice than existed before, making > it a lot easier for Forth programmers to move between different > implementations and even helping clarify some of the discussions here. In the 1980s, Forth was very popular. It was a serious contender with C and Pascal as the language to be used in personal computers. It was well known however that Forth-83 was a bad standard, but it was hoped that a good standard would come along soon. It is your fault that Forth-83 is a bad standard. You kicked Charles Moore out of Forth Inc. in 1982, then in 1983 you came out with Forth-83 that was worse than Forth-79 by most accounts. A lot of time went by. Forth declined in popularity, but it continued to be taken seriously. UR/Forth in particular was very competitive with Borland Turbo C for writing commercial programs. Finally, ANS-Forth came out. I think your primary goal was to kill UR/Forth by making in non-standard, and you accomplished this. Few if any of the UR/Forth users adopted ANS-Forth though --- almost all of them switched to C. Now there are fewer than 20 ANs-Forth programmers in the world, and most of them aren't really programmers in the sense that they write programs --- they spend all of their time on the Forth-200x mailing list pretending to be big experts who set the standard for the entire Forth community. The Forth community is pretty small though --- from what I've seen, there are more Russians than Americans and Europeans combined --- none of them are interested in ANS-Forth but all of them have non-standard Forth systems just as if there was no standard at all (my MFX, all of Ilya Tarasov's work, etc.). You claim to be a big winner! If this is what winning is like, what would losing be like?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 18:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7a0b9e1b-d05b-488a-bc24-0a89175730ea@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57021 |
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 8:14:21 AM UTC+9, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 1:18:22 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > But, looking back, ANS Forth has > > brought a lot more unity of Forth practice than existed before, making > > it a lot easier for Forth programmers to move between different > > implementations and even helping clarify some of the discussions here. > > In the 1980s, Forth was very popular. It was a serious contender with C and Pascal as the language to be used in personal computers. [... a bit incisive, a bit divisive, a bit of exaggeration ...] > > You claim to be a big winner! If this is what winning is like, what would losing be like? Uhm, Bill Gates? You may think that is a joke. I would not want on my conscience the things he has on his. Leading is a dangerous activity. You are criticizing someone who accepted some of the dangers and ended up doing things you didn't like. That's not necessarily bad, but I think you go a bit overboard. Concerning Forth, I think it would help if more people would recognize that it is not a single language, but an approach to developing application languages and a meta-set of tools. Or maybe it's a philosophy that allows one to write really lean versions of lexx/yacc that can be turned into applications, leaving the lexx and yacc parts in the application. (Which is actually considered a bad practice by some who misunderstand system security, but talking about that will distract me.) If I had been active in the community when the ANS Forth movement began, I would have suggested that they develop a family of standards, and suite of base toolsets, instead of an over-arching standard. As it exists, it is both overdone and insufficient. But so is ANSI C. Come to think of it, I can't think of an ANSI standard that is not both overdone and insufficient, in no small part because they try too hard to be everything for everyone. And, in spite of that, they are useful to many people. (And get in the way of many people.) Still, personal attacks really aren't warranted. This is personal advice, and maybe it doesn't belong here, but focusing only on people's bad sides surely isn't making you happy? -- Joel Rees http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.com/2017/01/soc500-00-00-toc.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 03:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <btGdnQQb-b6FD3HFnZ2dnUU7-T2dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #57026 |
Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> wrote: > If I had been active in the community when the ANS Forth movement > began, I would have suggested that they develop a family of > standards, and suite of base toolsets, instead of an over-arching > standard. If you had read the standard, you'd know that is exactly what it is: a small core wordset and a bunch of optional ones which are be useful for some applications. And there's never any point in suggesting that "they" do anything in their copious spare time. They aren't going to jump up and say "Hot damn, why didn't we think of that?" Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 11:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <62da9ce8-e888-4e2c-b42f-cfc8668886d6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57039 |
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 5:21:49 PM UTC+9, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Joel Rees wrote:
>
> > If I had been active in the community when the ANS Forth movement
> > began, I would have suggested that they develop a family of
> > standards, and suite of base toolsets, instead of an over-arching
> > standard.
>
> If you had read the standard,
{drama}
Oh, c'mon. Standards never improve! Why should I bother to go read the latest standard?
-- ahem. cough.
So I go read the Forth 2012 standard and am pleasantly surprised. It is most definitely an improvement. Either my memory is bad, or this document looks like it was written by an entirely different group of people than the last Forth standard I looked at. Maybe it's just me, but I could not figure out where to start with the last one I read. This one is useful.
{drama.}
> you'd know that is exactly what it is: a
> small core wordset and a bunch of optional ones which are be useful
> for some applications.
Did I say small core wordset? I don't recall saying that.
However, for all that a small core wordset is not a suite of base toolsets, if the standards committee continues this direction, Forth 2012 could function as the first toolset in such a suite.
> And there's never any point in suggesting that "they" do anything in
> their copious spare time.
Ouch.
> They aren't going to jump up and say "Hot
> damn, why didn't we think of that?"
>
> Andrew.
I have clearly let my biases (and a few hothead posts) lead me wrong.
Mea culpa.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-12 04:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ufSdnR6Fa8Eea3DFnZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #57056 |
Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 5:21:49 PM UTC+9, Andrew Haley wrote: Joel Rees wrote: >> >> > If I had been active in the community when the ANS Forth movement >> > began, I would have suggested that they develop a family of >> > standards, and suite of base toolsets, instead of an over-arching >> > standard. >> >> [ Standard Forth is ] a small core wordset and a bunch of optional >> ones which are be useful for some applications. > > Did I say small core wordset? I don't recall saying that. Well, I don't really know how to distinguish between a modularized standard, which is what we have, and a "family of standards." A "family of standards" is the same as a modularized standard, isn't it? > However, for all that a small core wordset is not a suite of base > toolsets, if the standards committee continues this direction, Forth > 2012 could function as the first toolset in such a suite. Sure, that's fair enough. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-11 13:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ocj4te$22q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #57021 |
On 4/10/2017 7:14 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 1:18:22 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> But, looking back, ANS Forth has >> brought a lot more unity of Forth practice than existed before, making >> it a lot easier for Forth programmers to move between different >> implementations and even helping clarify some of the discussions here. > > In the 1980s, Forth was very popular. It was a serious contender with C and Pascal as the language to be used in personal computers. It was well known however that Forth-83 was a bad standard, but it was hoped that a good standard would come along soon. > > It is your fault that Forth-83 is a bad standard. No, it is *my* fault. > You kicked Charles Moore out of Forth Inc. in 1982, then in 1983 you came out with Forth-83 that was worse than Forth-79 by most accounts. Again, you are wrong, this is all my doing! > A lot of time went by. Forth declined in popularity, but it continued to be taken seriously. UR/Forth in particular was very competitive with Borland Turbo C for writing commercial programs. Finally, ANS-Forth came out. I think your primary goal was to kill UR/Forth by making in non-standard, and you accomplished this. Few if any of the UR/Forth users adopted ANS-Forth though --- almost all of them switched to C. I have working with a number of behind the scenes players to totally undermind Forth as a viable programming language for a long time. What you don't realize is that I recruited Larry Forsley who in turn created UR/Forth in an attempt to undermine the commercial forth industry and create havoc among the Forth vendors. It was working quite well, even starting to undermine the vendors of *other* languages, both computer and spoken (not so much dead languages like Latin), until that durn ANS standard came out which the Forth vendors could rally behind. > Now there are fewer than 20 ANs-Forth programmers in the world, and most of them aren't really programmers in the sense that they write programs --- they spend all of their time on the Forth-200x mailing list pretending to be big experts who set the standard for the entire Forth community. The Forth community is pretty small though --- from what I've seen, there are more Russians than Americans and Europeans combined --- none of them are interested in ANS-Forth but all of them have non-standard Forth systems just as if there was no standard at all (my MFX, all of Ilya Tarasov's work, etc.). I see you have figured out my ultimate solution to ending the Forth programming community, posting rants here to make them spend their time justifying their use of Forth rather than actually using it. Lol You have to admit this is devilishly clever. I see you have been joining in the assault and are doing an even better job than I. > You claim to be a big winner! If this is what winning is like, what would losing be like? Oh wow! You don't want to see losing... -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 14:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2017Apr8.160419@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #56826 |
Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> writes:
>I'm sorry Mrs. Conklin/Rather, but how can Swiftforth, and Gforth be
>standard and yet not work with "Starting Forth" which is also supposed
>to be written in Standard Forth? This is rather confusing. If they are
>all "Truly" standard Forth, shouldn't they all be 100% compatible?
Yes. However, as Marcel Hendrix explained the updated version of
Starting Forth does not use standard Forth, but an enhanced version
that worked on iForth and SwiftForth when he updated it.
>[How can something] not be compatible with a
>book that has been setting the standard for the last 36 years?
It's obvious that Starting Forth has not been setting the standard for
the last 36 years. Neither the 1981 version (subsequent standards
were incompatible with it) nor the 2003 update by Marcel Hendrix (the
non-standard features he used were not picked up by additional systems
and were not proposed for standardization).
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2016: http://www.euroforth.org/ef16/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 09:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <oca2dq$95m$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #56820 |
In article <GWSFA.395181$FF4.231104@fx27.am4>, Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> wrote: <SNIP> > >Thanks for posting your views. Would you happen to have a list of "Truly >standard Forths", because I've checked out gForth, swift Forth, eforth, >CameForth, 4e4th, Win32Forth and none of them are "Truly standard >Forths". Some are mostly complaint, but none are 100%, which is how I >under "Truly" to mean. Thanks again. I'm sure that all authors of those Forths will be grateful for any reports about violations of Forth 94. most likely they will react with updates or work arounds. Also I'm sure that users of those Forths are grateful for remarks where you were bitten by documented deviations from Forth 94. > >Take care now, > >Darin Murphy > Groetjes Albert -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-08 12:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <-fydnQI1KMV7v3TFnZ2dnUU7-QudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #56820 |
Darin Murpy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: > >> joel.rees@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> My impression is that Forth is not a language so much as a point of >>> view and a willingness to manage your own symbol tables, and, as you >>> can tell from the responses, it's a very individual point of >>> view. (Lisp has the same kinds of problems.) This is why it's hard >>> to get a truly standard Forth. >> >> You could say the same about LISP, that's true. But in both languages >> there is a common standard, and many versions, some standard- >> compliant, some not. Truly standard Forth's aren't unusual. > > Thanks for posting your views. Would you happen to have a list of "Truly > standard Forths", because I've checked out gForth, swift Forth, eforth, > CameForth, 4e4th, Win32Forth and none of them are "Truly standard > Forths". Some are mostly complaint, but none are 100%, which is how I > under "Truly" to mean. What non-compliance do you have in mind? Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 21:31 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <oc9ecb$20u$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56541 |
On 4/1/2017 12:10 PM, Darin Murphy wrote: > Hey everybody! > > It's been a very, very long time since I posted on this site. Was > away from Forth for 6 months trying to go to UOPeople, which > wasn't what I expected. I started back up with Forth in Dec 2016 > and nearly finished with "Starting Forth". I like taking my time > to make sure I understand things very well and have already made > a much of small trivial programs outside of the book, including > one that was a tiny rogue game using a only 1 dimensional array > as the screen buffer. It was a blast! Rather than just reading the posts and taking everything for granted, I finally did some digging. I realize now what the problem is. Starting Forth is *not* 100% compatible with all standard Forths. This is a flaw in the book that Ms Conklin has explained in a recent post in this thread. In reading some of your more recent posts I see you are assuming that Starting Forth *must* be 100% standard. But it is *not*. Ms Conklin points out some of the issues. > Anyway, I've stumbled upon an issue with the book and was > wondering if someone knew where I can find a free forth that > works with my Raspberry Pi and uses all of the same exact words > as the ones in "Starting Forth" on Forth Inc.'s site? I > understand it's a tall order, but just thought I'd ask. I've > already tried 4e4th, which is a great little Forth that runs on a > MSP430, but it's so small that it's missing a lot of words (i.e., > missing all of Chapter 3 words). Chapter 3 is called "The Editor (and Staff)" which makes me think it originally included a description of a line editor. I can't find my printed copy or I would check. In any event, the point is most of that chapter is obsolete. I know there is at least one Forth system that still uses blocks, the Forth system used for developing code for the GA144. Otherwise I think they are few and far between. So don't worry about chapter 3. > I've also tried gForth which has > a crazy amount of words, and has gotten me successfully up to > Chapter 7, but than it too is missing a bunch of words that are > in the book. About the word OCTAL, the book says, "OCTAL ( -- ) Sets the base to eight (available on some systems)". That is a clear indication you should not assume it is part of the Forth standard. As I mentioned in my other post, the number formats used for double words in the book are not universal. What else does not work from Chapter 7? > I've been able to get most of Chapter 8, and 9 done > and now working on Chapter 10. Whew it's been a awesome > adventure! Forth is actually better than I initially thought and > I can't wait to see what I learn next about it. Once I've > finished both "Staring Forth" and "Thinking Forth" and gotten > some experience under my belt I'll be moving on to ARM Assembly. > Having those two under my belt is going to be blast! If you like ARM assembly, you will LOVE Mecrisp, a Forth for a number of embedded MCUs including a number of ARM processors. Written by Matthias Koch almost entirely in assembly it allows you to run Forth directly on rather small processors. What you won't love is the lack of documentation. But if you know German you can read all of the code comments (some are English, some German) and easily learn how it all works (well, more easily that I did having to look up a lot of technical terms in German which isn't so easy to do). There is a Mecrisp documentation site at http://128.199.141.78/ by Terry Porter. Yes, it is just an IP address without a URL. I don't know why he prefers that, but there it is. This is probably the best documentation available. I've created a domain name that points to his main page. armforth.org I've used the TI Stellaris launchpad (not sure what they call it now but Steallaris was the chip line that was bought by TI for their low end ARMs) and can help if you would like. Terry uses the STmicro ARMs. If you want to use their boards he can be a great resource. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 20:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <WpidnYwLxI1x3HXFnZ2dnUU7-QfNnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #56833 |
On 04/07/2017 08:31 PM, rickman wrote: > If you like ARM assembly, you will LOVE Mecrisp, a Forth for a number of > embedded MCUs including a number of ARM processors. Written by Matthias > Koch almost entirely in assembly it allows you to run Forth directly on > rather small processors. ARM assembly isn't too bad but I am developing a deep hatred of the Thumb mode bit. It reminded me of the book "The Soul of a New Machine" so I dug up my copy and started to re-read it. I ported over the version of eForth I had developed for the MSP430 which went smoothly enough except for keeping track of when that damn mode bit should and shouldn't be set. You would think that a processor that is exclusively Thumb mode would ignore that bit. It doesn't. -- David W. Schultz http://home.earthlink.net/~david.schultz "Life without stock is barely worth living..." - Anthony Bourdain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-07 22:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <oc9g96$tri$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #56836 |
On 4/7/2017 9:50 PM, David Schultz wrote: > On 04/07/2017 08:31 PM, rickman wrote: >> If you like ARM assembly, you will LOVE Mecrisp, a Forth for a number of >> embedded MCUs including a number of ARM processors. Written by Matthias >> Koch almost entirely in assembly it allows you to run Forth directly on >> rather small processors. > > ARM assembly isn't too bad but I am developing a deep hatred of the > Thumb mode bit. It reminded me of the book "The Soul of a New Machine" > so I dug up my copy and started to re-read it. > > I ported over the version of eForth I had developed for the MSP430 which > went smoothly enough except for keeping track of when that damn mode bit > should and shouldn't be set. You would think that a processor that is > exclusively Thumb mode would ignore that bit. It doesn't. Do you mean the MSP432? The MSP430 is not an ARM, it's a totally separate 16 bit processor by TI. Some say the assembly language is akin to the PDP/LSI-11. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web