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 19 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 17 18 [19] 20 21 Next page →
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-01 01:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b5ebb09d-afcd-4495-b36e-256fefc0a108@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28195 |
On Friday, January 31, 2014 7:03:14 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 1/31/14 3:44 PM, Julian Fondren wrote: > > Forth is forever crippled by ANS Forth's requirement (look it > > up) that words compile into HERE. If you want to compile > > multiple words at the same time so that you can define your > > words in your words instead of having to think up names for > > them, you're just going to have to come up with a completely > > new language. > > > Did I miss anything? > Dunno, is the above a parody? I hope so, because ANS Forth drew a very > clear distinction between *data space* which a standard program can > access in a variety of ways, and dictionary or code space, which user > programs have virtually no direct access to. The dictionary is entirely > implementation-dependent, and neither its location, structure nor > contents are prescribed in any way by the standard. > > HERE points to the next location in *data space*. That was a pretty snarky rejoinder, to describe is post as a "parody" (you sound a lot like Passaniti). The truth is that Julian has a good point (the same point that I was making). Code can only be compiled into one place. If you want to pause the compilation of a colon word to compile something else (such as a quotation), your quotation or whatever has to be compiled into the middle of the colon word with a BRANCH around it. This is what Bernd Payson did in his implementation of quotations (also, as I have said, he failed to provide the quotation with access to the creator function's local variables). The big problem with the ANS-Forth document is that it overuses the word "may." It is too wishy-washy. The ANS-Forth standard says that code-space and data-space may be the same or may be separate. Well, which is it??? The only way to write a portable program, is to assume the worst-case, which is that they are the same. But this is effectively as if ANS-Forth had required them to be the same! So what is the point of allowing them to be separate? Anybody who writes code assuming that they are separate will have a vendor-specific program. In SwiftForth, code-space and data-space are the same. Code gets compiled at HERE, although HERE is actually the data-space pointer. The reason why ANS-Forth is so wishy-washy, is that your #1 priority was to make sure that SwiftForth would be compliant. SwiftForth has code-space and data-space combined, so you made this compliant --- but you pulled the rug out from under all of the Forth implementations that have code and data separate. It makes more sense to have them separate, but you weren't going to upgrade SwiftForth, so you made ANS-Forth support the lowest-common-denominator (SwiftForth) --- and to hell with the rest of the Forth community. There are many examples of the ANS-Forth document saying that something may or may not be done, forcing the programmer who wants to write a portable program to assume the worst-case scenario. When you write a standard, you need to have enough spine to make decisions as to what is not allowed. Some Forth implementations (mostly SwiftForth) are going to be losers, in the sense that they will have to be rewritten in order to become compliant. But ANS-Forth is like the Special Olympics where everybody gets to be a winner without any effort, and every Forth implementation gets to be compliant without any effort. The result is that almost all Forth code is vendor-specific --- but this is the pre-standard problem that the standard was supposed to fix. Allowing SwiftForth to be ANS-Forth compliant, required that ANS-Forth be dumbed down significantly --- that is what killed Forth! You dragged the entire Forth community down to your own level of incompetence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-01 11:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52ecdbb0$0$24932$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #28194 |
In article <4b7906ec-711d-411c-92af-31a398fa369f@googlegroups.com>, Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> wrote: <SNIP> > >Forth is forever crippled by ANS Forth's requirement (look it >up) that words compile into HERE. I have a different take. HERE is the name for the place where words are defined. It is a luxury to reveal that information. Other languages don't have that. >If you want to compile >multiple words at the same time so that you can define your >words in your words instead of having to think up names for >them, you're just going to have to come up with a completely >new language. It is easy to switch DP. I use that for e.g. constructing a sample object to calculate field offsets. > >Did I miss anything? > >This just has to be a deliberate parody of ANS Forth haters. ?? > >-- Julian 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 | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-01 08:11 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <se6dnR5d8rBUpXDPnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28202 |
On 2/1/14 1:34 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <4b7906ec-711d-411c-92af-31a398fa369f@googlegroups.com>, > Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> wrote: > <SNIP> >> >> Forth is forever crippled by ANS Forth's requirement (look it >> up) that words compile into HERE. > > I have a different take. HERE is the name for the place where > words are defined. It is a luxury to reveal that information. > Other languages don't have that. For Standard Programs, HERE is the place where data objects may be put. 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 | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-02 14:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52ee55fa$0$25266$e4fe514c@dreader34.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #28205 |
In article <se6dnR5d8rBUpXDPnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@supernews.com>, Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote: >On 2/1/14 1:34 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote: >> In article <4b7906ec-711d-411c-92af-31a398fa369f@googlegroups.com>, >> Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> wrote: >> <SNIP> >>> >>> Forth is forever crippled by ANS Forth's requirement (look it >>> up) that words compile into HERE. >> >> I have a different take. HERE is the name for the place where >> words are defined. It is a luxury to reveal that information. >> Other languages don't have that. > >For Standard Programs, HERE is the place where data objects may be put. Of course. ( I realized it and should have corrected it. It may or may not be a place where compilation takes place. My example was about building up a data structure. ) > >Cheers, >Elizabeth 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@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-02 18:28 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3d18df0e-dffa-426e-9d7b-a5de6d839874@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28202 |
On Saturday, February 1, 2014 4:34:08 AM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article <4b7906ec-711d-411c-92af-31a398fa369f@googlegroups.com>, > I have a different take. HERE is the name for the place where > words are defined. It is a luxury to reveal that information. > Other languages don't have that. No it isn't; HERE provides the data-space pointer in ANS-Forth. In some Forths, such as SwiftForth, it is also the code-space pointer. This is a problem because, if you pause the compilation of a colon word to compile some data, the data will end up in the middle of your code corrupting it. > It is easy to switch DP. I use that for e.g. constructing a > sample object to calculate field offsets. This isn't true either. DP was a Forth-83 word. ANS-Forth got rid of DP and only provided HERE to prevent Forth programmers from changing DP. Given your lack of knowledge of pretty much any subject (and especially the subjects that you claim to be an expert on), I think that you should stick to editing Wikipedia pages --- Wikipedia doesn't have any requirement that the editors know anything about the subjects that they edit --- that is really the best home for you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-07 13:34 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ld1h8j$vjk$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #28163 |
hughaguilar96@yahoo.com wrote: > On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 4:07:27 PM UTC-7, Ed wrote: > > When it comes to case statements, Forth hasn't made it easy. Positional > > cases require manual effort to setup and are no panacea; and the case ANS > > provided lacks features/performance other languages take for granted. > > 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. > That contest that FIG hosted to implement a CASE was in 1980. The criteria was that the code > had to be written in Forth and not use carnal knowledge of some particular compiler and not > use assembly-language. The goal was to support Fig-Forth compilers hence Fig-specific stuff like ?PAIRS and ITC tricks were acceptible. > It is pretty cool that Forth allows stuff like that to be written --- > IMMEDIATE words really are a one of Forth's best features. But I doubt that Eaker or anybody > at FIG expected this code to be still in use in 2014 --- it was just a fun contest to help > novices learn Forth. Yes, and being a contest, *someone* had to win - irrespective of the quality of the entries. It is mostly forgotten but there were three winning entries, of which Eaker's was one. > 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. 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".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-07 03:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ld1hq4$lot$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #28255 |
Ed wrote: >> Your statement, "When it comes to case statements, Forth hasn't made it >> easy," is totally untrue. As I said before, Forth is what you want it to >> be. A CASE statement is easy for somebody who knows how to program --- >> there is no inherent weakness in Forth that makes a CASE statement any >> more difficult than it would be in any other language. > > From memory there is no portable way to resolve multiple THENs, so users > are stuck with ANS CASE, IF ELSE THEN or a positional solution if the > circumstances warrant. I'm pretty sure that the following is fully portable: : case 0 ; immediate : of ( case-sys -- case-sys ) >r postpone over postpone = postpone if r> ; immediate : endof ( case-sys -- case-sys' ) >r postpone else r> 1+ ; immediate : thens ( then1..thenn n -- ) 0 ?DO postpone then LOOP ; immediate : endcase ( case-sys -- ) postpone drop postpone thens ; immediate -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-08 09:41 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ld3nh5$eol$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #28257 |
Bernd Paysan wrote: > Ed 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. Mis-quoted. I did not say that. > > 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. > > I'm pretty sure that the following is fully portable: > > : case 0 ; immediate > ... > : thens ( then1..thenn n -- ) 0 ?DO postpone then LOOP ; immediate Not portable - assumes control-flow is on data stack and 0 is a valid item. But will work on many systems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-07 18:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xaxqd4xg5zc71u@localhost> |
| In reply to | #28265 |
On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:41:19 -0500, Ed <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure that the following is fully portable:
>>
>> : case 0 ; immediate
>> ...
>> : thens ( then1..thenn n -- ) 0 ?DO postpone then LOOP ; immediate
>
> Not portable - assumes control-flow is on data stack and 0 is a valid
> item.
>
> But will work on many systems.
>
How good are the Hayes tests at confirming correct CASE behavior?
It seems the Hayes tests have one simple set of CASE tests which tests
the basic CASE functionality. It also has one complicated set of tests
for CASE. I'm not really clear on what the complex set of tests is
actually testing other than the code itself appears complicated ...
I constructed a few simple CASE tests of my own for Josh Grams'
small-tester.f to test the basic operations of CASE. His tester is
smaller and accepts Hayes style tests with a trivial format change.
I also test for extra issues that I noticed with CASE. I believe my
tests to be sufficient enough to test basic CASE functionality, but
I'm a bit unsure about portability and boundary issues. So, these
are my Grams tests for CASE:
: TC0 CASE 1 OF 5 ENDOF 2 OF 6 ENDOF 7 ENDCASE 8 ;
: TC1 CASE 1 OF 5 ENDOF 2 OF 6 ENDOF 7 SWAP ENDCASE 8 ;
T{ 1 TC0 => 5 8 }T
T{ 2 TC0 => 6 8 }T
T{ 3 TC0 => 3 8 }T
T{ 3 TC1 => 7 8 }T
Do you "see" the additional issues I'm checking for? If not, compare
with the simple set of CASE tests in the Hayes tester.
So, not to put you on the spot, but since you're refreshed on the issues
of implementing CASE and interested in them, would you be willing to post
Hayes style tests for CASE?
The tests should be simple to understand, or as simple as they can be
made. They should be thorough enough to ensure correct CASE operation.
They should test for, or be designed to not have, non-portable issues
and/or boundary problems, like those you brought up in this thread.
Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-08 00:31 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1x3x2jassyk0z.qwv4utynox9p$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #28265 |
Op Sat, 8 Feb 2014 09:41:19 +1100 schreef Ed: > Bernd Paysan wrote: >> Ed 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. > > Mis-quoted. I did not say that. > >>> 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. >> >> I'm pretty sure that the following is fully portable: >> >>: case 0 ; immediate >> ... >>: thens ( then1..thenn n -- ) 0 ?DO postpone then LOOP ; immediate > > Not portable - assumes control-flow is on data stack and 0 is a valid item. You're wrong, only the count if items to be resolved are assumed to be there. The control-flow may use its own stack or the data stack, it does not matter. > > But will work on many systems. Naturally, -- Coos CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-08 11:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ld5408$164$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28265 |
on 07/02/2014 22:41:22, "Ed" wrote: > Bernd Paysan wrote: >> > From memory there is no portable way to resolve multiple THENs, so users >> > are stuck with ANS CASE, IF ELSE THEN or a positional solution if the >> > circumstances warrant. >> >> I'm pretty sure that the following is fully portable: >> >> : case 0 ; immediate >> ... >> : thens ( then1..thenn n -- ) 0 ?DO postpone then LOOP ; immediate > > Not portable - assumes control-flow is on data stack and 0 is a valid > item. The control flow is dealt with by the compilation of THEN. THENS doesn't care. Only the count is on the data stack. > > But will work on many systems. It will work on all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-08 15:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ld5dfo$of8$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #28265 |
Ed wrote: > Not portable - assumes control-flow is on data stack and 0 is a valid > item. No, you don't get it. I put *my* part of the information for the control flow on the data stack. Where the system puts its part is completely irrelevant. This will work everywhere. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-08 19:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2b99e79c-6aef-402c-8667-322d3f24509e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28272 |
On Saturday, February 8, 2014 7:03:36 AM UTC-7, Bernd Paysan wrote: > Ed wrote: > > > Not portable - assumes control-flow is on data stack and 0 is a valid > > item. > No, you don't get it. I put *my* part of the information for the control > flow on the data stack. Where the system puts its part is completely > irrelevant. This will work everywhere. I've said before that the big problem with ANS-Forth is that it is wishy-washy --- that it overuses the word "may." This is yet another example! The control-stack may or may not be the same as the data-stack. So, to write portable code, the programmer has to assume the worst-case scenario, that they are the same. You actually know this perfectly well, but you claim otherwise in posts such as this on comp.lang.forth to bamboozle people who aren't familiar with the ANS-Forth standard --- I mean, you are either ignorant of the ANS-Forth standard (pretty remarkable for somebody on the Forth-200x committee), or you are lying (sadly typical for people on the Forth-200x committee), and I think it is the latter. In my language I will require that the control-stack is distinct from the data-stack. This might slow down compilation slightly because the control-stack pointer will be a memory variable rather than a register (on processors such as the x86 that have a register shortage), but who cares about compilation speed in 2014? Once again, ANS-Forth had to be dumbed-down to allow SwiftForth to be ANS-Forth compatible. SwiftForth has control-flow data on the data stack (Elizabeth Rather has described this as being "convenient," meaning that the Forth Inc. implementers were too lazy to do it right) and so ANS-Forth had to allow this --- Forth Inc. wasn't going to bend to conform to ANS-Forth, so the ever-flexible ANS-Forth had to bend to conform to SwiftForth --- pulling the rug out from under the rest of the Forth community. In my novice package, I have a lot of :NAME words that use a lot of local variables. The reason for this is that they can't hold their data on the data stack while meta-compiling a colon word, because the colon word likely has control-flow words that are putting data on the control-flow stack, which "may" conflict with my data --- this is a lot of complication, just to work-around the bad design of ANS-Forth --- the whole novice package is an assortment of complicated work-arounds for the bad design of ANS-Forth. Nobody wants to acknowledge that the novice package exists because doing so would require also acknowledging the problems with ANS-Forth that it is working around --- it is easier to just say that it "sucks" (Passaniti), that I'm "stupid" (Bernd Payson), that I'm a "novice" (Elizabeth Rather), etc., etc..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-09 08:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ld7eh3$2oc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28275 |
on 09/02/2014 03:58:53, wrote: > On Saturday, February 8, 2014 7:03:36 AM UTC-7, Bernd Paysan wrote: >> Ed wrote: >> >> > Not portable - assumes control-flow is on data stack and 0 is a valid >> > item. > >> No, you don't get it. I put *my* part of the information for the control > >> flow on the data stack. Where the system puts its part is completely >> irrelevant. This will work everywhere. > > I've said before that the big problem with ANS-Forth is that it is > wishy-wa shy --- that it overuses the word "may." This is yet another > example! The c ontrol-stack may or may not be the same as the > data-stack. So, to write por table code, the programmer has to assume > the worst-case scenario, that they are the same. You actually know The CASE code you are talking about doesn't know where the control stack for IF/ELSE/THEN is kept, and it doesn't need to know. > this perfectly well, but you claim otherwi se in posts such as this on > comp.lang.forth to bamboozle people who aren't familiar with the > ANS-Forth standard --- I mean, you are either ignorant of the > ANS-Forth standard (pretty remarkable for somebody on the Forth-200x c > ommittee), or you are lying (sadly typical for people on the > Forth-200x com mittee), and I think it is the latter. > What are you and Ed on? It's clear that you've both got so much wrong headed information about the standard and in this specific case (pun intended) where control flow *can* be maintained as opposed to where you *think* it *must* be maintained -- that it's blown every fuse in your tiny brain. [rest of usual dribble snipped]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-09 19:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6bced7b9-403d-489d-bb7e-92b481249d1b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28277 |
On Sunday, February 9, 2014 1:33:39 AM UTC-7, Alex McDonald wrote: > What are you and Ed on? It's clear that you've both got so much wrong > headed information about the standard and in this specific case (pun > intended) where control flow *can* be maintained as opposed to where you > *think* it *must* be maintained -- that it's blown every fuse in your > tiny brain. > > [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, items 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? I wonder what the ANS-Forth technical committee was smoking when they wrote this standard. Elizabeth Rather must have brought them some "Maui Wowi" from Hawaii, where she supposedly lives.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-10 08:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lda3dn$31c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28288 |
on 10/02/2014 03:50:58, wrote: > On Sunday, February 9, 2014 1:33:39 AM UTC-7, Alex McDonald wrote: >> What are you and Ed on? It's clear that you've both got so much wrong >> headed information about the standard and in this specific case (pun >> intended) where control flow *can* be maintained as opposed to where you >> *think* it *must* be maintained -- that it's blown every fuse in your >> tiny brain. >> >> [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 > implement ation. 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 pla ced 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, > physical ly 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. That's the mistake Ed made and apparently you made too in suggesting that Bernd's CASE wasn't portable. Because of the standard, it is portable. Why? Because (1) it uses the data stack for its own control flow and (2) it doesn't assume that it has the data stack to itself. > > I wonder what the ANS-Forth technical committee was smoking when they > wrote this standard. Elizabeth Rather must have brought them some > "Maui Wowi" fr om Hawaii, where she supposedly lives. > Declarations of undying love for Ms Rather don't cut it as an argument. I do hope the preface of your Doped Up Forth or whatever it's called doesn't have too much of this kind of justification.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-13 16:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c3916a19-4503-458a-bacc-774adf8b5310@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28290 |
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-flow --- I said the exact opposite. I said that, when meta-compiling (such as with my :NAME in the novice package), it is necessary to have data available during meta-compilation (typically 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 bugs in ANS-Forth design. > That's the mistake Ed made and apparently you made too in suggesting that > Bernd's CASE wasn't portable. Because of the standard, it is portable. > Why? Because (1) it uses the data stack for its own control flow and (2) > it doesn't assume that it has the data stack to itself. You are just being a suck-up. The ANS-Forth standard was screwed up 20 years ago, and you are still defending it in a disgusting brown-nose manner typical of comp.lang.forth (BTW: the word is "drivel" not "dribble" --- you illiterate moron!). Saying that I made a "mistake" in understanding Bernd's code is just a troll attack, comparable to saying that I'm "stupid" (Bernd Payson), a "novice" (Elizabeth Rather), etc.. In fact, I haven't looked at Bernd's code, haven't commented on it, and don't have any interest in it. From Bernd's and your comments, I take it that he is holding control-flow data on the data-stack, so that is definitely conflicting with the data-stack being used by the application programmer to hold data during meta-compilation. What I said is that the ANS-Forth standard is too wishy-washy. Section 3.2.3.2 is an obvious example. This says that the control-stack may or may not be the data-stack. Obviously, the ANS-Forth TC understood that the control-stack should be distinct from the data-stack so that data could be held on the data-stack during meta-compilation (rather than held in local variables as I am forced to do in the novice package). But SwiftForth has the control-stack being the same as the data-stack, so the ANS-Forth TC was required to say that this is ANS-Forth standard too, so as to allow SwiftForth to be ANS-Forth compliant without being upgraded at all. To write portable code, the programmer has to assume the worst-case scenario which is that the control-stack is the same as the data-stack, so anybody who assumes that the control-flow stack is distinct from the data-stack will have a vendor-specific program which is not portable to other vendor's compilers (mostly, not portable to SwiftForth). The #1 goal of the ANS-Forth TC was, apparently, to allow SwiftForth to be ANS-Forth compliant without any upgrade --- to essentially make SwiftForth the new standard. This means that all of the myriad bugs and bad design of SwiftForth became standardized for the entire Forth community for the next 20 years. The ANS-Forth standard was dumbed-down to the level of SwiftForth so that SwiftForth could be ANS-Forth compliant without any upgrade. The same thing is going on now in Forth-200x. Leon Wagner killed my ALLOCATION RfD without reading it, purely on the basis that it wasn't already in SwiftForth and he wasn't going to upgrade SwiftForth in any way. SwiftForth is like a boat anchor that is chained to the ankles of all Forth programmers everywhere --- nobody is allowed to write a compiler that rises above SwiftForth's abysmal level of quality (at least, not without losing ANS-Forth compliance, which is what VFX did in regard to CREATE DOES>) --- this is why Forth has such a bad reputation in the real world. Rather than just call me stupid or claim that I said something other than what I did say, how about if somebody provides a justification for 3.2.3.2.? Give an explanation other than the explanation that I gave (that 3.2.3.2. says the control-stack "may" be the data-stack solely to allow SwiftForth to be ANS-Forth compliant without any upgrade). There are myriad examples of the ANS-Forth document saying that something "may or may" not be done --- always, the choices are: may make sense or may be SwiftForth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-14 02:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1193tk4cxc2yq.1382doevi4pif.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #28401 |
Op Thu, 13 Feb 2014 16:32:15 -0800 (PST) schreef hughaguilar96@yahoo.com: <snip usual drivel> > I said that, when meta-compiling (such as with my :NAME in the novice package), > it is necessary to have data available during meta-compilation (typically 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 bugs in ANS-Forth design. You are mistaken, nowhere in the standard documents is meta-compilation mentioned. So if you want control flow data on the data stack or elsewhere, it's your responsability. No-one else cares. -- Coos
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-13 23:04 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <49ef5d79-6888-4918-bdbf-3b0f0641fff9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28406 |
On Thursday, February 13, 2014 6:36:39 PM UTC-7, Coos Haak wrote: > Op Thu, 13 Feb 2014 16:32:15 -0800 (PST) schreef hughaguilar96@yahoo.com: > > <snip usual drivel> > > I said that, when meta-compiling (such as with my :NAME in the novice package), > > it is necessary to have data available during meta-compilation (typically 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 bugs in ANS-Forth design. > You are mistaken, nowhere in the standard documents is meta-compilation > mentioned. So if you want control flow data on the data stack or elsewhere, > it's your responsability. No-one else cares. So, I'm "mistaken" now --- but what about being "stupid" --- don't hold back! So, ANS-Forth doesn't support meta-compilation? Why do we have POSTPONE then? And, once again, I don't want to put control-flow stuff on the control-stack --- I said the exact opposite. This is just more brown-nosing --- a pathetic attempt to support SwiftForth/ANS-Forth by completely twisting my words around.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-13 23:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7a1bded8-8d24-4ea1-acf2-afaf912181a3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28411 |
On Friday, February 14, 2014 12:04:31 AM UTC-7, hughag...@yahoo.com wrote: > And, once again, I don't want to put control-flow stuff on the control-stack --- I said the exact opposite. That was a typo --- I meant that I don't want to put control-flow stuff on the data-stack --- I want control-flow stuff on the control-flow stack where it doesn't conflict with the user's data on the data-stack --- 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).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 19 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 17 18 [19] 20 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web