Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #28006 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-01-22 13:52 -0800 |
| Last post | 2014-01-26 01:59 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 412 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-22 13:52 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-22 21:57 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-22 14:10 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-22 14:11 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-01-23 00:14 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-22 14:28 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-23 20:22 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-01-23 12:34 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-25 22:44 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-25 08:49 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-01-25 19:40 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-26 23:01 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-23 03:43 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-23 10:10 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-01-23 10:31 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-23 11:35 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-01-23 13:27 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-01-23 05:52 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-23 15:50 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 01:51 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 02:00 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 02:08 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 02:26 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-24 14:23 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 05:41 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-26 00:49 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-01-26 03:01 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-01-23 05:52 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-23 08:21 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? BF <foxaudioresearch@gmail.com> - 2014-01-23 06:54 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-01-23 16:00 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-01-23 20:21 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-01-23 20:33 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-24 04:33 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-10 23:14 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2014-01-24 10:49 +0200
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-24 03:26 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-24 04:25 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-27 22:09 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-01-28 22:38 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-23 03:22 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-23 06:52 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-23 16:03 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-23 10:14 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-23 17:42 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-23 10:42 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-24 15:01 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-23 17:21 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-23 12:16 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-24 09:25 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-24 07:16 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 05:43 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-01-24 10:57 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-25 03:58 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-27 17:24 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-27 19:25 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-28 03:34 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-24 14:50 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-27 17:15 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-01-24 21:00 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-01-25 20:47 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-10 23:36 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-01-24 00:44 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-24 09:20 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-23 10:02 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-23 09:05 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-27 00:43 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-26 18:04 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-01-26 11:27 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-01-26 22:09 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-26 15:35 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-29 01:57 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-01-28 13:46 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-28 12:12 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-30 17:19 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-01 00:40 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-31 06:33 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-31 12:13 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-31 08:36 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-01 00:06 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-01-31 15:34 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-03 16:18 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-02-01 03:17 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-02 13:10 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-02 16:06 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-02 10:43 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-02 18:39 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-03 14:18 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-02 18:49 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-03 09:35 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2014-02-03 09:56 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-02-03 02:50 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-02-03 03:17 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-03 14:31 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-03 19:17 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-04 12:23 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-03 19:26 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-04 08:05 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-02 19:07 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-30 15:59 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-01-31 02:34 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-01-31 02:38 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-30 15:51 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-03 14:58 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-02-03 12:06 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-09 15:04 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-02-09 10:56 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-10 15:58 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-02-10 12:06 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-11 11:22 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-02-11 05:23 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-02-12 10:54 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-10 18:12 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-10 05:13 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-10 15:44 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-10 10:40 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-10 17:47 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-10 16:34 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-10 11:09 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-10 17:20 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-10 12:14 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-02-10 22:38 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-11 03:46 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-02-11 10:30 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-11 18:24 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-12 15:02 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-12 11:23 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-13 09:25 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-13 04:54 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-13 13:41 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-13 14:14 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-13 08:41 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-13 15:29 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-13 12:07 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-15 16:14 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-15 13:22 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-17 12:28 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-17 14:05 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-17 09:49 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-17 19:06 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-17 12:52 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-17 22:51 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-18 04:36 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-18 09:34 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-18 05:01 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-18 14:19 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-18 08:28 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-18 17:14 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-18 11:46 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-18 18:20 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-19 17:10 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-19 23:17 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-20 09:55 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-21 20:15 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-22 12:08 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 14:45 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 02:29 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 21:29 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 22:33 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 22:13 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-24 17:30 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-24 14:38 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-26 12:59 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-26 20:12 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-27 04:54 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-02-27 12:56 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-27 06:30 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-27 05:29 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-27 15:48 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-27 08:13 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-27 16:23 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-28 11:21 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-28 16:20 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-01 01:51 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-28 23:36 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-01 12:45 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-03-01 13:59 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-01 13:03 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-03-01 07:53 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-27 10:12 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-27 08:46 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-27 10:56 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-27 10:08 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-27 11:01 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-27 08:12 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-27 16:23 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-02-27 19:53 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-27 07:48 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-27 16:05 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-27 08:27 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-27 10:45 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-27 20:51 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-03-01 08:46 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-03-01 16:53 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-03-01 15:06 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-03-04 01:50 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-03 17:18 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-03-04 02:51 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-03-04 03:20 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-04 19:12 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-03-05 03:51 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-04 10:11 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-03-05 14:09 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-01 11:20 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-03-01 15:43 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-01 22:16 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-03-02 04:56 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-02 14:07 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-03-03 00:59 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-02 08:20 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-03-03 03:03 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-06 18:09 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-03-06 17:26 -0600
WITHIN (was: CASE mis-understanding?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-07 12:51 +0000
Re: WITHIN Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-07 12:13 -0800
Re: WITHIN mhx@iae.nl - 2014-03-08 05:07 -0800
Re: WITHIN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-08 15:43 +0000
Re: WITHIN mhx@iae.nl - 2014-03-08 08:23 -0800
Re: WITHIN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-08 16:37 +0000
Re: WITHIN mhx@iae.nl - 2014-03-08 10:18 -0800
Re: WITHIN mhx@iae.nl - 2014-03-08 10:48 -0800
Re: WITHIN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-08 16:02 +0000
Re: WITHIN Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-09 01:24 -0800
Re: WITHIN anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-09 18:16 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-06 21:46 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-07 09:22 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-07 12:28 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-07 19:36 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-06 18:25 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-06 23:52 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-07 10:15 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-07 08:38 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-07 09:36 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-03-02 20:16 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-27 08:18 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-07 13:21 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-03-07 08:26 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-27 10:37 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-01 11:31 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-07 13:18 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-07 11:17 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2014-03-09 20:49 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-27 16:22 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-28 15:22 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-28 18:32 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-01 03:39 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-03-04 02:19 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-27 13:03 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-24 01:25 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-24 03:36 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-24 02:04 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-03-04 01:15 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-02-22 21:09 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 21:55 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-02-23 00:47 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 01:45 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-20 17:07 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-20 16:03 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-21 04:11 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-21 10:59 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-21 03:26 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-02-21 10:34 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-21 05:49 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-02-22 13:52 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-22 09:13 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-22 10:45 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-21 20:18 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-22 15:24 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-22 10:37 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-11 03:20 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-03-11 16:15 -0400
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-12 00:10 -0700
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-22 13:28 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-22 08:56 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 01:27 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-23 04:33 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 08:11 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 21:44 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 22:48 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-03-04 02:23 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-24 16:05 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-02-24 18:15 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-24 18:45 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-02-24 19:18 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-26 12:40 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Tristan Plumb <st@trstn.net> - 2014-02-26 15:27 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-03-04 01:31 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-03-04 16:30 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-05 11:48 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-22 18:28 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Gary Bergstrom <forthprgrmr@gmail.com> - 2014-02-24 08:39 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-24 21:29 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-11 00:44 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-11 00:45 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-23 04:35 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-18 12:31 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-18 18:19 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-18 11:06 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-18 12:51 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-18 14:40 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-18 08:17 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-18 04:48 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-18 13:56 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-18 11:15 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-18 18:24 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-19 03:46 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-21 15:52 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-22 09:10 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-18 13:09 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-18 15:03 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-13 15:53 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-14 00:39 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-14 06:38 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-15 15:37 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-15 13:33 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2014-02-11 10:50 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-02-11 10:57 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-11 02:35 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-11 11:47 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-11 13:08 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-11 18:42 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-12 10:54 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-12 05:31 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-12 15:52 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-12 10:41 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-13 09:27 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-13 04:49 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-13 13:54 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? mhx@iae.nl - 2014-02-03 12:26 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-07 13:41 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-02-07 01:08 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-08 09:56 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-07 12:15 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-01 00:39 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-01-31 07:29 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-04 23:45 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-31 16:31 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-03 12:35 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-03 09:32 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-08 09:31 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-08 11:22 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-03 13:54 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-31 08:40 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-01-26 22:03 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? julian.fondren@gmail.com - 2014-01-29 17:19 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2014-01-30 11:15 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-01-27 13:57 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-28 14:01 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-28 14:49 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-01-29 10:07 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-01-28 21:54 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Stefan Mauerhofer <smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> - 2014-01-29 00:33 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-01-29 03:37 -0600
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-01-30 21:51 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-31 18:44 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2014-02-09 00:34 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-09 22:14 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-11 01:25 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-01-31 17:44 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-31 16:03 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-01 01:55 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-01 11:34 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-01 08:11 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-02 14:28 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-02 18:28 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-07 13:34 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-07 03:52 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-08 09:41 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-07 18:33 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-02-08 00:31 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-08 11:21 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-08 15:03 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-08 19:58 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-09 08:33 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-09 19:50 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-10 08:42 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-13 16:32 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-02-14 02:36 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-13 23:04 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-13 23:40 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-14 04:37 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-14 09:42 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-15 16:52 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-16 07:46 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-16 08:11 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-16 16:15 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-02-17 09:03 +0100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-16 22:12 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-02-17 02:29 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-17 04:27 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-17 09:36 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-17 09:22 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-17 12:06 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-17 20:18 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-11 01:48 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-03-11 16:10 -0400
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-14 13:54 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-06 17:03 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> - 2014-02-08 09:39 +1100
Re: CASE mis-understanding? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-02-07 20:12 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-09 21:33 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 02:38 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 16:17 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 08:54 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-24 09:25 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 20:34 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-01-24 11:13 -1000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-24 17:39 -0500
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-24 16:05 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-25 11:46 +0000
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-01-25 16:15 -0800
Re: CASE mis-understanding? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-01-26 01:59 +0100
Page 20 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 18 19 [20] 21 Next page →
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-14 04:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xa9mb9qh5zc71u@localhost> |
| In reply to | #28412 |
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 02:40:25 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote: > [...] --- I want control-flow stuff on the control-flow stack where > it doesn't conflict with the user's data on the data-stack If the control-flow stuff is on the return-stack, "it doesn't conflict with the user's data on the data-stack." I only bring that up because of the following: > --- this is why the ANS-Forth TC introduced the concept of a > "control-flow stack" rather than just have a data-stack as in Forth-83, > but then they undermined themselves by allowing the control-flow stack > to be the data-stack (and the only possible explanation for why they did > this was to allow SwiftForth to be ANS-Forth compliant without needing > to be upgraded). ISTM, that the ANS concept of a "control-flow stack" was to allow for it's placement where best suited for any particular Forth. I.e., you could have a control-flow stack, return stack, data stack, all separate. Or, it could be placed on one them. The concept seems to even allow for the control-flow stack be eliminated for STC or compiled Forth. I.e., it's an attempt to allow for adapting Forth to a variety of implementations, or to abstract Forth from the underlying architecture. I won't get into the negatives of doing so. Both were done to C with negative results. Of course, the opposite was done with Forth, which many here still rile against. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-14 09:42 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <FI-dnXB9MJAB7GPPnZ2dnUVZ_uKdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28418 |
On 2/13/14 11:37 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 02:40:25 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> [...] --- I want control-flow stuff on the control-flow stack where >> it doesn't conflict with the user's data on the data-stack > > If the control-flow stuff is on the return-stack, "it doesn't conflict > with the user's data on the data-stack." I only bring that up because > of the following: > >> --- this is why the ANS-Forth TC introduced the concept of a >> "control-flow stack" rather than just have a data-stack as in >> Forth-83, but then they undermined themselves by allowing the >> control-flow stack to be the data-stack (and the only possible >> explanation for why they did this was to allow SwiftForth to be >> ANS-Forth compliant without needing to be upgraded). > > ISTM, that the ANS concept of a "control-flow stack" was to allow for > it's placement where best suited for any particular Forth. I.e., you > could have a control-flow stack, return stack, data stack, all separate. > Or, it could be placed on one them. The concept seems to even allow for > the control-flow stack be eliminated for STC or compiled Forth. > > I.e., it's an attempt to allow for adapting Forth to a variety of > implementations, or to abstract Forth from the underlying architecture. > I won't get into the negatives of doing so. Both were done to C with > negative results. Of course, the opposite was done with Forth, which > many here still rile against. Don't forget that the "control flow stack" (wherever it is) exists only during compilation, and has nothing to do with the application code you write. It's invisible to the programmer. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-15 16:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <302fb35a-1bfe-40fb-ae2e-b237a8db9bdd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28433 |
On Friday, February 14, 2014 12:42:19 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/13/14 11:37 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 02:40:25 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> [...] --- I want control-flow stuff on the control-flow stack where > >> it doesn't conflict with the user's data on the data-stack > > > If the control-flow stuff is on the return-stack, "it doesn't conflict > > with the user's data on the data-stack." I only bring that up because > > of the following: > > >> --- this is why the ANS-Forth TC introduced the concept of a > >> "control-flow stack" rather than just have a data-stack as in > >> Forth-83, but then they undermined themselves by allowing the > >> control-flow stack to be the data-stack (and the only possible > >> explanation for why they did this was to allow SwiftForth to be > >> ANS-Forth compliant without needing to be upgraded). > > > ISTM, that the ANS concept of a "control-flow stack" was to allow for > > it's placement where best suited for any particular Forth. I.e., you > > could have a control-flow stack, return stack, data stack, all separate. > > Or, it could be placed on one them. The concept seems to even allow for > > the control-flow stack be eliminated for STC or compiled Forth. > > > I.e., it's an attempt to allow for adapting Forth to a variety of > > implementations, or to abstract Forth from the underlying architecture. > > I won't get into the negatives of doing so. Both were done to C with > > negative results. Of course, the opposite was done with Forth, which > > many here still rile against. I didn't bother responding to Rod's post previously, because it is all nonsense --- it is not possible to have the control-stack be the same as the return-stack. The ANS-Forth document (3.2.3.2.) says that the control-stack may or may not be the same as the data stack. Rod doesn't really know anything about Forth --- total ignorance is demonstrated in statements such as: "If the control-flow stuff is on the return-stack, 'it doesn't conflict with the user's data on the data-stack.' " Elizabeth Rather is apparently okay with responding to nonsense, or just doesn't recognize nonsense because she doesn't know any more about Forth than Rod does (all she knows is what is in "Starting Forth"). > Don't forget that the "control flow stack" (wherever it is) exists only > during compilation, and has nothing to do with the application code you > write. It's invisible to the programmer. So, an application programmer isn't allowed to do meta-compilation (write words that generate other words)? This is an incredible quote that only Elizabeth Rather could blurt out! Well, no wonder she hates :NAME and all that meta-compilation in my novice package! I've delved into the realm of the invisible! She must consider my definers such as 1ARRAY etc. to be the work of sorcery from the invisible world --- maybe if she tattooed a crucifix on her forehead she would feel safe from my code. LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-16 07:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xbdkfqkd5zc71u@localhost> |
| In reply to | #28465 |
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 19:52:21 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote: > I didn't bother responding to Rod's post previously, because it is all > nonsense --- it is not possible to have the control-stack be the same as > the return-stack. Is isn't *possible*? ... You can't return from a Forth word in the middle of existing control-flow. The control-flow sequence must be completed first. (This is where an understanding of structured code, especially in C, would help you.) Therefore, there is no conflict. I.e., it is *possible* to use the return-stack as the control-flow stack. It would seem to me that a conflict issue between control-flow and user data on the data stack is more likely. The user uses the data stack far more frequently than the return-stack. The only real issue with using the return-stack for control-flow is that data must be moved to it from the data stack and back. > The ANS-Forth document (3.2.3.2.) says that the > control-stack may or may not be the same as the data stack. ... > Rod doesn't really know anything about Forth --- total ignorance is > demonstrated in statements such as: "If the control-flow stuff is on > the return-stack, 'it doesn't conflict with the user's data on the > data-stack.' " How would it conflict? > Elizabeth Rather is apparently okay with responding to nonsense, or just > doesn't recognize nonsense because she doesn't know any more about Forth > than Rod does (all she knows is what is in "Starting Forth"). I've implemented a Forth interpreter in C at first, now mostly in Forth. So, I know far more than many Forth people do about Forth. Of course, there are people who are far better versed at this than I am. Admittedly, I'm not fond of the language or experienced much in it, other than implementing the Forth system words in Forth. But, coding them is still coding quite a bit of Forth ... Much of it was coded from scratch, some from existing common definitions, some the result of Forth optimizers, and some of it converted to Forth from Forth in C, and also from C not remotely expressed as anything like Forth. It seems unlikely to me that there are more than a few people around here who can convert C to Forth, or the reverse, as I demonstrated in a reply to Julian Noble many years ago. I'm not saying my interpreter is perfect. All I know is that it seems to work correctly (when I don't mess things up). It passes the tests I coded. It passes Hayes core for the words that are implemented. ANS compliance wasn't even attempted ... It is mainly fig-Forth based. Now, you can attribute that to my skill, or perhaps to the excellence of the Forth standards ... Either way, things are (mostly) working as expected. It's not a completed project, yet. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-16 08:11 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <iPudnfRIO-vVYp3OnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28483 |
On 2/16/14 2:46 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 19:52:21 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> I didn't bother responding to Rod's post previously, because it is all >> nonsense --- it is not possible to have the control-stack be the same >> as the return-stack. > > Is isn't *possible*? ... It's quite possible, but unnecessary and rarely done. Remember, the "control flow stack" discussed in the Standards is *not* the stack where things like DO ... LOOP indices are kept, it's where the place to patch the forward or backward branch is kept during compilation. User code never sees these things, except via words like CS-PICK, which few application writers use. Putting the control flow items on the return stack would solve no problems and add unnecessary instructions. The standards carefully avoid mandating that it be the data stack because the policy is not to mandate implementation. > You can't return from a Forth word in the middle of existing control-flow. > The control-flow sequence must be completed first. (This is where an > understanding of structured code, especially in C, would help you.) > Therefore, there is no conflict. I.e., it is *possible* to use the > return-stack as the control-flow stack. It would seem to me that a > conflict > issue between control-flow and user data on the data stack is more likely. > The user uses the data stack far more frequently than the return-stack. > The only real issue with using the return-stack for control-flow is that > data must be moved to it from the data stack and back. Yes. But users use the data stack for run-time code. They rarely use it during compilation. >> The ANS-Forth document (3.2.3.2.) says that the >> control-stack may or may not be the same as the data stack. > ... Indeed. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-16 16:15 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c258e4f7-a91b-4d55-bbcc-f330d2479182@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28485 |
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 11:11:18 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/16/14 2:46 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 19:52:21 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> I didn't bother responding to Rod's post previously, because it is all > >> nonsense --- it is not possible to have the control-stack be the same > >> as the return-stack. > > > Is isn't *possible*? ... > It's quite possible, but unnecessary and rarely done. Remember, the > "control flow stack" discussed in the Standards is *not* the stack where > things like DO ... LOOP indices are kept, it's where the place to patch > the forward or backward branch is kept during compilation. User code > never sees these things, except via words like CS-PICK, which few > application writers use. Putting the control flow items on the return > stack would solve no problems and add unnecessary instructions. The > standards carefully avoid mandating that it be the data stack because > the policy is not to mandate implementation. It is not possible to have the control-stack be the return-stack. Control-flow words such as IF ELSE THEN etc. are just ordinary colon words executing during the compilation of a colon word. They can't put data on the return stack because that data will be used as a return-address which will result in a system crash. This will occur if a colon word is being compiled interactively on the command-line and it is more than one line long. Kerblewey! Duh! I previously described Rod's assertion that the control-stack could be the return-stack as "total ignorance of Forth" and I speculated that Elizabeth Rather doesn't know any more about Forth than Rod does --- her response proves that she really doesn't know any more, as she also asserted that the control-stack could be the return-stack. And she is supposed to be our leader??? > > You can't return from a Forth word in the middle of existing control-flow. > > The control-flow sequence must be completed first. (This is where an > > understanding of structured code, especially in C, would help you.) Yes you can! As I said above, this happens when compiling a colon word interactively at the command-line and the colon word is more than one line long --- the outer interpreter returns after every line --- kerblewey! Do either of you even know what the outer interpreter is? > > Therefore, there is no conflict. I.e., it is *possible* to use the > > return-stack as the control-flow stack. It would seem to me that a > > conflict > > issue between control-flow and user data on the data stack is more likely. > > The user uses the data stack far more frequently than the return-stack. > > The only real issue with using the return-stack for control-flow is that > > data must be moved to it from the data stack and back. > Yes. But users use the data stack for run-time code. They rarely use it > during compilation. Rarely? Who cares if it is rare or often? If it is legal then it has to be supported, and it has to be done correctly. Meta-compiling is important whether it is rare or not --- all of my defining words in the novice package use meta-compilation, so it is important to me --- it should be important to anybody who knows what meta-compilation is (not either of you, apparently). When I wrote my "alien alphabet" program (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/3Y4w_MdYl0k) I discovered a bug in Gforth that restricted the size of colon words. This bug won't get found when people write colon words by hand, because they typically write short colon words. The bug will get found when people meta-compile colon words because they typically generate lengthy colon words (as I did in my pattern-matching function). Anton Ertl did fix the bug after I pointed it out. The fact that I found the bug at this late data however, implies that I'm the first person who ever did any meta-compiling under Gforth --- that is pretty sad, as Anton Ertl is supposed to be teaching people how to program in Forth, but he apparently has never taught anybody about the concept of meta-compilation or done it himself. > >> The ANS-Forth document (3.2.3.2.) says that the > >> control-stack may or may not be the same as the data stack. > > ... > > Indeed. To write portable code, the programmer has to assume the worst-case scenario, which is that the control-stack and the data-stack are the same --- so you effectively made SwiftForth the ANS-Forth standard, because SwiftForth is always the worst-case scenario in regard to implementation. You did standardize implementation! You standardized SwiftForth's screwed-up implementation! Forth Inc. is the boat-anchor that is chained to the ankles of every Forth programmer in the world --- by dumbing-down the ANS-Forth standard to allow SwiftForth to be ANS-Forth compliant without any upgrade, you held everybody in the Forth community down to your own level of incompetence. This is why I hate you!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-17 09:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <85iosew4gt.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> |
| In reply to | #28483 |
Rod Pemberton wrote: > I've implemented a Forth interpreter in C at first, now mostly in > Forth. So, I know far more than many Forth people do about Forth. I wouldn't be so sure. I have done the same exercise (although the details differ; e.g. mine is metacompiled), and in my experience this didn't make me a much of a good Forth programmer at all. Sure, you learn a lot of the low-level nuts and bolts, but that doesn't necessarily transfer to being able to write good Forth code.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-16 22:12 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <g4ednfCFIswcWZzOnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28491 |
On 2/16/14 10:03 PM, Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > Rod Pemberton wrote: >> I've implemented a Forth interpreter in C at first, now mostly in >> Forth. So, I know far more than many Forth people do about Forth. > > I wouldn't be so sure. I have done the same exercise (although the > details differ; e.g. mine is metacompiled), and in my experience this > didn't make me a much of a good Forth programmer at all. Sure, you > learn a lot of the low-level nuts and bolts, but that doesn't > necessarily transfer to being able to write good Forth code. I agree. Over the years, whenever we've sought to hire Forth programmers, we've found those who have written applications to be far more skilled in Forth than those who have just implemented Forths, especially in another language such as C. Does building a car teach you how to drive? Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-17 02:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b808fd1d-bfc7-413c-b09f-6aed3a7f5e20@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28492 |
On Monday, February 17, 2014 9:12:47 AM UTC+1, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > Over the years, whenever we've sought to hire Forth programmers, > we've found those who have written applications to be far more > skilled in Forth than those who have just implemented Forths, > especially in another language such as C. Does building a car > teach you how to drive? Would you hire Jack Dongarra to write the Matlab code for your laser noise calculations? -marcel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-17 04:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b5652954-752a-44d0-93d5-7af65f6de2aa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28493 |
On Monday, 17 February 2014 10:29:56 UTC, m.a.m....@tue.nl wrote: > On Monday, February 17, 2014 9:12:47 AM UTC+1, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > > Over the years, whenever we've sought to hire Forth programmers, > > we've found those who have written applications to be far more > > skilled in Forth than those who have just implemented Forths, > > especially in another language such as C. Does building a car > > teach you how to drive? > > Would you hire Jack Dongarra to write the Matlab code for your laser > noise calculations? > > -marcel Nice teeth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Dongarra There's no point in arguing whether designing a car makes you a better driver or not, since although the two skills are not transposable, they are not entirely unrelated. The skills of driving help inform the process for designing a better car and the skills of designing produce a car that meets the driving specification. No-one would employ Nicholas Tombazis to drive an F1 Ferarri, and no-one would hire Fernando Alonso to design one. However, you might have hired a Louis Chevrolet; he was both a successful designer and driver. To be frank, I suspect I would not want to work for either of you. The corollary; it's probable that neither of you would care to hire me. The car will have to remain a dream.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-17 09:36 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <jqqdnd5636hf-Z_OnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28494 |
On 2/17/14 2:27 AM, Alex McDonald wrote: > On Monday, 17 February 2014 10:29:56 UTC, m.a.m....@tue.nl wrote: >> On Monday, February 17, 2014 9:12:47 AM UTC+1, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> >>> Over the years, whenever we've sought to hire Forth programmers, >>> we've found those who have written applications to be far more >>> skilled in Forth than those who have just implemented Forths, >>> especially in another language such as C. Does building a car >>> teach you how to drive? >> ... > > There's no point in arguing whether designing a car makes you a better > driver or not, since although the two skills are not transposable, they > are not entirely unrelated. The skills of driving help inform the process > for designing a better car and the skills of designing produce a car that > meets the driving specification. I would expect that an experienced driver with a sound engineering background could design a good car. The converse doesn't necessarily follow. My point is that if you're good at *using* something (whether a car or a programming language) you have a more informed judgement about what user needs are and what things need to be prioritized. In the specific case of Forth, since it is so different from many other languages, implementers who haven't mastered Forth from a user point of view may carry their expectations from whatever languages they *do* know into making implementation decisions that are not as good as they might be. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-17 09:22 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <KbGdnf-IYfIR_J_OnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28493 |
On 2/17/14 12:29 AM, m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl wrote: > On Monday, February 17, 2014 9:12:47 AM UTC+1, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> Over the years, whenever we've sought to hire Forth programmers, >> we've found those who have written applications to be far more >> skilled in Forth than those who have just implemented Forths, >> especially in another language such as C. Does building a car >> teach you how to drive? > > Would you hire Jack Dongarra to write the Matlab code for your laser > noise calculations? Sorry, don't know Jack. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-17 12:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <31e7e954-7ac9-4462-af7d-41d461821fda@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28504 |
On Monday, 17 February 2014 19:22:51 UTC, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/17/14 12:29 AM, m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl wrote: > > > > > Would you hire Jack Dongarra to write the Matlab code for your laser > > noise calculations? > > Sorry, don't know Jack. > > That's the best reply posted here this year. It's in the Oscar Wilde "I wish I'd said that" category. On the downside, Hugh will no doubt be all over it like a rash.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-17 20:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <fb81f4a9-67af-4cfb-a4a8-686ce9c3b489@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28492 |
On Monday, February 17, 2014 1:12:47 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/16/14 10:03 PM, Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > > Rod Pemberton wrote: > >> I've implemented a Forth interpreter in C at first, now mostly in > >> Forth. So, I know far more than many Forth people do about Forth. > > > I wouldn't be so sure. I have done the same exercise (although the > > details differ; e.g. mine is metacompiled), and in my experience this > > didn't make me a much of a good Forth programmer at all. Sure, you > > learn a lot of the low-level nuts and bolts, but that doesn't > > necessarily transfer to being able to write good Forth code. > I agree. Over the years, whenever we've sought to hire Forth > programmers, we've found those who have written applications to be far > more skilled in Forth than those who have just implemented Forths, > especially in another language such as C. Does building a car teach you > how to drive? Here is an example of some code from SwiftForth v2 (maybe v3 as well, although I haven't checked): LABEL R-GO-ON2 EDX PUSH EAX JMP END-CODE CODE R-BUF ( -- ) EAX POP ESP ECX MOV MAX_PATH # ESP SUB ESP EDX MOV ECX PUSH R-GO-ON2 CALL ECX POP ECX ESP MOV RET END-CODE : WID-HEADER ( c-addr u wid -- ) OVER 0= -16 ?THROW ?UNIQUE -ROT 254 MIN R-BUF R@ PLACE HERE 13 + R@ C@ + 15 AND 16 SWAP - ALLOT LOCATION , R@ COUNT ROT LINKED $FF C, 0 C, R> COUNT EMPLACE HERE 1+ HERE LAST CELL+ 2! 0 C, ; Notice that R-BUF pushes its data onto the return-stack rather than the data-stack. In WID-HEADER we see R@ and R> without any corresponding >R --- this is because R-BUF does the >R internally. Now in this thread we have Elizabeth Rather agreeing with Rod in saying that it is possible to use the return-stack as the control-stack. In order to do this, words such as IF ELSE THEN etc. would have to work similar to R-BUF in that they remove their own return-address from the return-stack, push data onto the return-stack, push their return-address back onto the return-stack, and finally do a RET. Of course, this isn't going to work if the word that called them (that would be the outer interpreter) does an EXIT before getting that data off the return-stack. Kerblewey! To me, this is incredibly bad Forth code. Most likely, the programmer who wrote R-BUF didn't know about the data-stack. He most likely has a background in assembly-language and has never programmed in Forth --- when he was tasked with writing R-BUF he was told that it should push its datum onto the "stack" and he assumed this meant the return-stack because nobody told him that Forth has a data-stack --- and nobody ever corrected his mistake, so his code ended up in the production release of SwiftForth. Note that this programmer was a graduate of Elizabeth Rather's Forth class at Forth Inc..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-11 01:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lflq1b$35b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28509 |
hughaguilar96@yahoo.com wrote: > Here is an example of some code from SwiftForth v2 (maybe v3 as well, although I haven't checked): > > LABEL R-GO-ON2 > EDX PUSH > EAX JMP > END-CODE > > CODE R-BUF ( -- ) > EAX POP > ESP ECX MOV > MAX_PATH # ESP SUB > ESP EDX MOV > ECX PUSH > R-GO-ON2 CALL > ECX POP > ECX ESP MOV > RET END-CODE > > : WID-HEADER ( c-addr u wid -- ) > OVER 0= -16 ?THROW ?UNIQUE > -ROT 254 MIN R-BUF R@ PLACE > HERE 13 + R@ C@ + 15 AND 16 SWAP - ALLOT > LOCATION , R@ COUNT ROT LINKED > $FF C, 0 C, > R> COUNT EMPLACE > HERE 1+ HERE LAST CELL+ 2! 0 C, ; Totally unreadable and unmaintainable. It doesn't get any worse than that. No real programmer would produce code like that unless you held a gun to his head. If this is the Forth way, then Forth is to programming languages what shit is to food. However, I'm sure that the mindless worshippers of Forth will defend this code.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-11 16:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.xckqa5no6zenlw@localhost> |
| In reply to | #29005 |
On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:48:28 -0400, WJ <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> wrote: > hughaguilar96@yahoo.com wrote: >> [snipped - code from Swiftforth posted by Hugh in response] >> [to what Hugh thinks a C programmer would do in Forth that] >> [no sane Forth programmer would do. This was misunderstood] >> [by WJ. But, BP said elsewhere that he thinks Hugh is psycho] >> [which begs the question as to how Hugh recognized that code] >> [is insane Forth ...] > > Totally unreadable and unmaintainable. > > It doesn't get any worse than that. > > No real programmer would produce code like that unless you > held a gun to his head. > > If this is the Forth way, then Forth is to programming languages > what [excrement] is to food. > > However, I'm sure that the mindless worshippers of Forth will > defend this code. No they won't. Hugh cited that as an example of what *not* to do. Then, you post a month later saying it's a prime example of what *not* to do ... ROFL. If you had actually read Hugh's post instead of mindlessly replying to his posts, or if you hadn't snipped so much context, perhaps you would've recognized what he had said. I added bracketed [] comments above to clarify the issue. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-14 13:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ldl75t$emi$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28401 |
on 14/02/2014 00:32:15, wrote: > On Monday, February 10, 2014 1:42:31 AM UTC-7, Alex McDonald wrote: >> >> [rest of usual dribble snipped] >> >> > Well, here is some more dribble: >> > ANS-Forth 3.2.3.2: >> > "The control-flow stack may, but need not, physically exist in an >> > implementation. If it does exist, it may be, but need not be, >> > implemented using the data stack. The format of the control-flow stack >> > is implementation defined. Since the control-flow stack may be >> > implemented using the data stack, item s placed on the data stack are >> > unavailable to a program after items are placed on the control-flow >> > stack and remain unavailable until the control-flow stack items are >> > removed." >> >> > The entire ANS-Forth document is like this: "...may, but need not, >> > physically exist in an implementation. If it does exist, it may be, >> > but need not be , implemented..." LOL This is a standard??? What was >> > standardized? > >> Enough was standardised to let implementors deliver IF THEN ELSE AHEAD DO >> LOOP and so on without confusion. All of the words above make really >> simple statements. Use the data stack for control flow if you wish; but >> words that assume they have the data stack to themselves during >> compilation aren't going to work across multiple Forths. > > You apparently have no idea what is being discussed, or what has been > said. I definitely did not say that I "wish" to use the data-stack for > control-f low --- I said the exact opposite. The "you" is meant as "one"; i.e. not you specifically. It's a feature of modern English that allows this construct; "one may use the data stack if one wishes" is now considered quite old fashioned. Read it as "one". > > I said that, when meta-compiling (such as with my :NAME in the novice > packa ge), it is necessary to have data available during > meta-compilation (typica lly to be given to LITERAL). The data-stack > can't be used for this because the control-flow words (IF THEN ELSE > AHEAD etc.) "may or may not" be using the data-stack as the > control-stack. Because of this, in my novice package I have to hold > all of this data in local variables rather than on the data- stack --- > this is just one of the many work-arounds I use to overcome the b ugs > in ANS-Forth design. Bug? I suspect you actually mean "restriction or freedom I don't like". So, during meta-compilation, you (that's "you Hugh", not "one") feel the need to carry some data from word to word and want to use the data stack without hindrance. Since ANS Forth has forced you to compromise and you are not supporting nested compilation, why not use global variables or values instead? Or locals; that seems a good compromise, and hardly worth kicking up your usual shitstorm of pointlessness about. [usual dribble snipped; in summary it said Elizabeth "Gru" Rather, her sidekick Dr Nefario and her SwiftForth minions have stolen the moon. Well, Forth anyhow, and the moon is next. She has succeeded in binding Forth implementors up with local variables. And to have all one's programs crash and burn because of, well just because data stack, it's obvious! How fiendishly clever! You'll be sorry when the moon disappears. Don't say I didn't tell you. \end dribble]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-06 17:03 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <avednUFT0tea0GnPnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28255 |
On 2/6/14 4:34 PM, Ed wrote: ... >> It blows my mind that Elizabeth Rather "conducted a study" and >> determined that this toy code was going to be standardized in ANS-Forth as the best that >> Forth has to offer --- that is just a gross lack of leadership. For the record, it was not my study, it was the TC's (I don't remember who was in the group that did it). The whole FIG membership and all known implementers were included in the survey, which was several pages long and covered a variety of topics. > There is a letter in FD 19/5 revealing a 'heated discussion' occured in ANS over the > Eaker CASE. It appears not everyone was happy. M. Bradley promoted a kludge to > work-around the limitations. Once the idea got into ANS' consciousness that Eaker > must be included, commonsense went out the window. After that, few in ANS have > been game to state the obvious - that "the emperor has no clothes". Personally, I backed a different approach, but Eaker was "common practice". Now 20 years later, it's my experience that Eaker has worked fine in many applications, and it's been easy to implement other kinds of switches when appropriate. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-08 09:39 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ld3nh3$eol$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #28258 |
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/6/14 4:34 PM, Ed wrote: > ... > >> It blows my mind that Elizabeth Rather "conducted a study" and > >> determined that this toy code was going to be standardized in ANS-Forth as the best that > >> Forth has to offer --- that is just a gross lack of leadership. Mis-quoted. I did not say that. > For the record, it was not my study, it was the TC's (I don't remember > who was in the group that did it). The whole FIG membership and all > known implementers were included in the survey, which was several pages > long and covered a variety of topics.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-07 20:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <27c5b3c4-ff2b-4096-9c8e-8b9f0096d3c3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28255 |
On Thursday, February 6, 2014 7:34:31 PM UTC-7, Ed wrote: > hughaguilar96@yahoo.com wrote: > > Your statement, "When it comes to case statements, Forth hasn't made it easy," is totally > > untrue. As I said before, Forth is what you want it to be. A CASE statement is easy for > > somebody who knows how to program --- there is no inherent weakness in Forth that makes a > > CASE statement any more difficult than it would be in any other language. > From memory there is no portable way to resolve multiple THENs, so users are stuck > with ANS CASE, IF ELSE THEN or a positional solution if the circumstances warrant. The point that I was making, was that you were using the term "Forth" as a synonym for "ANS-Forth." It is certainly true that ANS-Forth makes CASE difficult --- ANS-Forth makes everything difficult --- but this doesn't at all imply that "Forth" makes these things difficult. As I said: Forth is what you want it to be (for the ANS-Forth TC, a screwed-up mess --- a projection of their own minds --- but that is not all Forthers). > ...few in ANS have > been game to state the obvious - that "the emperor has no clothes". Well, it is a thankless miserable job. This reminds me of when I was in junior high-school. The principal had a poster on the wall that said: "Never try to teach a pig to sing --- it wastes your time, and it annoys the pig."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 20 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 18 19 [20] 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web