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 18 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 Next page →
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-08 11:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ld541g$164$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28263 |
on 07/02/2014 22:31:09, "Ed" wrote: > Alex McDonald wrote: >> ... >> You shouldn't partake in public fora if the public response bothers you. > > You and Anton do not constitute a public response though there may be > others. I will not be blackmailed and bullied by deluded characters > who are under the impression they are free to pursue and harass > individuals to the point where they can no longer post on a forum in > peace and are forced to leave. > > Forums are not venues for exploitation, though you two appear to think > so. No-one has the right to force themselves upon another, or to > ignore instructions to be left alone. > > As you failed to heed my previous post and instruction to get out of > my face and stay the hell away from me, I trust this one leaves no > room for doubt. Just to make it absolutely clear, this applies to both > of you and anyone else with ideas of making trouble. > > > Get a lawyer, and listen carefully to what he tells you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-03 13:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Feb3.145429@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #28211 |
"Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> writes:
>Anton Ertl wrote:
>> "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> writes:
>> >Anton Ertl wrote:
>> >> "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> writes:
>> >> > ...
>> >> >The above demonstrates the limitation of ANS CASE. Because it doesn't cater
>> >> >for more than one case per block, it must be simulated. It does this by testing
>> >> >each case and OR'ing the results - a slow and cumbersome process. There's
>> >> >no advantage ordering the cases (for speed) because all must be tested.
>> >>
>> >> No, once a test succeeds, the following OFs are not tested.
>> >> ...
>> >
>> >You are implying I said such a thing. Show where I said it, or retract your
>> >statement.
>>
>> I quoted what you wrote, and what I was referring to. In particular I
>> referred to the last sentence.
>
>You took a sentence out of context for your own ends, ignoring what was
>said immediately before it and omitting the detailed explanation which
>followed it.
What "ends" are you imagining? I quoted everything that you wrote
before; what came after was mostly code without explanation.
Concerning what you wrote immediately before, I found it confusing
(what do you mean with "simulated", with "block" and with "case"?),
so, yes, I ignored it as context.
In any case, if I misunderstood you, it would be more productive to
explain what you meant with terminology that even I can understand
rather than complaining about my ignoring your context; or, if you
think that I am the only one who misunderstood what you meant, it
probably is good enough to just ignore my comment; everybody else
would see that it has nothing to do with what you meant anyway.
>I have no problem staying away from you. OTOH you seem incapable of
>staying away from me. Why exactly is that? I distinctly recall you stating
>some time ago that you would refrain from bothering me.
I wrote that I am not going to work through your proposals and comment
on them (unless they become official RfDs). You did not welcome such
feedback.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2013: http://www.euroforth.org/ef13/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-31 08:40 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <j_Cdna-WAuGmc3bPnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28171 |
On 1/30/14 5:59 AM, Anton Ertl wrote: > "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> writes: ... >> The above demonstrates the limitation of ANS CASE. Because it doesn't cater >> for more than one case per block, it must be simulated. It does this by testing >> each case and OR'ing the results - a slow and cumbersome process. There's >> no advantage ordering the cases (for speed) because all must be tested. > > No, once a test succeeds, the following OFs are not tested. If you > know that one of the cases dominates (say, lower case letters), you > can increase efficiency by putting that OF first. That's an important point. ENDOF branches to the point beyond the ENDCASE. 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 | Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-26 22:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4282ac35-b815-4e95-95a8-f5581d82c9fc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28108 |
On Sunday, January 26, 2014 3:43:23 PM UTC+2, Ed wrote:
>
> Presented with a complex CASE scenario such as the one below, how
> would you and Stephen approach it, assuming it had to be reasonably
> efficient?
> hex
> : TEST1 ( n ) space
> case
> cond
> 00 1F range
> 7F equal when ." Control char " else
> cond
> 20 2F range
> 3A 40 range
> 5B 60 range
> 7B 7E range when ." Punctuation " else
> cond 30 39 range when ." Digit " else
> cond 41 5A range when ." Upper case letter " else
> cond 61 7A range when ." Lower case letter " else
> drop ." Not a character "
> end-case ;
Try this !
/Mikael
-test1
marker -test1
: ct: ( ew cw n -- ) \ compile a condition table
( m -- m ) \ execute aword corresponding to m.
\ m may consist of several stack cells
\ it is upto the condition word to
\ preserve m on the stack
create
dup , \ store the condition table size
0 do
, , \ store an entry
loop
does> \ m addr
dup @ \ m addr n
0 do
cell+ dup \ m addr addr
cell+ >r \ m addr
@ex \ m flag
if \ m
r> @ex rdrop exit \ m a match was found
then
r>
loop
drop
;
\ Helper words
: .punctuation ." Punctuation" drop ;
: range 1+ within ;
\ Default branch
:noname ." Not a character" drop ;
' true
:noname ." Control char" drop ;
:noname dup bl < ;
:noname ." Digit" drop ;
:noname dup [char] 0 [char] 9 range ;
:noname ." Lower case letter" drop ;
:noname dup [char] a [char] z range ;
:noname ." Upper case letter" drop ;
:noname dup [char] A [char] Z range ;
' .punctuation
:noname dup bl [char] / range ;
' .punctuation
:noname dup [char] : [char] @ range ;
' .punctuation
:noname dup [char] [ [char] ` range ;
' .punctuation
:noname dup [char] { [char] ~ range ;
\ define a condition table
#9 ct: test1
char 3 test1
char y test1
char P test1
char ä test1
8 test1
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | julian.fondren@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-29 17:19 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <834757f5-4b1e-4d71-a4cf-d59ac2549f59@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28118 |
On Monday, January 27, 2014 12:03:55 AM UTC-6, Mikael Nordman wrote:
> Try this !
> /Mikael
>
> -test1
> marker -test1
> : ct: ( ew cw n -- ) \ compile a condition table
> ( m -- m ) \ execute aword corresponding to m.
> \ m may consist of several stack cells
> \ it is upto the condition word to
> \ preserve m on the stack
> create
> dup , \ store the condition table size
> 0 do
> , , \ store an entry
> loop
> does> \ m addr
> dup @ \ m addr n
> 0 do
> cell+ dup \ m addr addr
> cell+ >r \ m addr
> @ex \ m flag
> if \ m
> r> @ex rdrop exit \ m a match was found
> then
> r>
> loop
> drop
> ;
Because you use RDROP EXIT instead of UNLOOP EXIT ,this crashes on any Forth
where DO..LOOP maintains more than one cell on the return stack.
> \ Helper words
> : .punctuation ." Punctuation" drop ;
> : range 1+ within ;
>
> \ Default branch
> :noname ." Not a character" drop ;
> ' true
>
> :noname ." Control char" drop ;
> :noname dup bl < ;
>
> :noname ." Digit" drop ;
> :noname dup [char] 0 [char] 9 range ;
>
> :noname ." Lower case letter" drop ;
> :noname dup [char] a [char] z range ;
>
> :noname ." Upper case letter" drop ;
> :noname dup [char] A [char] Z range ;
>
> ' .punctuation
> :noname dup bl [char] / range ;
>
> ' .punctuation
> :noname dup [char] : [char] @ range ;
>
> ' .punctuation
> :noname dup [char] [ [char] ` range ;
>
> ' .punctuation
> :noname dup [char] { [char] ~ range ;
>
> \ define a condition table
> #9 ct: test1
>
> char 3 test1
> char y test1
> char P test1
> char ä test1
> 8 test1
1. Why do you need to pass an explicit size of the table?
This means that any edit to the table requires that this
explicit size also change. You could instead drop a
sentinel on the stack, like 0, and then find it:
: find-zero ( 0 ... -- ... n )
depth 0 ?do
i pick 0= if i roll drop i unloop exit then
loop ;
: ct: ( ew cw -- ) ( m -- m )
create find-zero 2/ dup ,
( and so on ) ;
0
:noname ." Not a character drop ;
' true
\ ...
' .punctuation
:noname dup [char] { [char] ~ range ;
ct: test1
Or instead of writing FIND-ZERO you could have CT: keep
adding cases until it runs into the zero or out of stack.
2. Why require that the user always write :NONAME ... ; '
TRUE for the default case? CT: becomes a no-op when no test
succeeds, leaving the tested cell(s) on the stack, so it
pretty much needs at least some clean-up as a default case.
: :default 0 ( case sentinel ) :noname ;
: ;default postpone ; ['] true ; immediate
:default ." Not a character" drop ;default
\ ...
' .punctuation
:noname dup [char] { [char] ~ range ;
ct: test1
3. Why does every one of your tests need a DUP ? Was that
only so that this structure could remain neutral about the
cell-width of whatever it's testing? Although your example
shows multiple uses of .PUNCTUATION , that your tests must
not consume their arguments prevents you from using normal
Forth words as tests. You might instead store the cell width
in the table created by CT: and have that word duplicate N
cells on the stack, or have the appropriate stack-maintenance
words compiled into your tests by a TEST: word.
4. Why don't your tests just EXIT on failure, instead of
having separate :NONAMEs for success? You have an example of
reusing .PUNCTUATION , but it's not like it's any harder to
compile .PUNCTUATION multiple times than it is to produce its
XT multiple times.
: ccount ( addr -- addr' x ) dup cell+ swap @ ;
: perform @ execute ;
: ct: ( 0 xt1 xt2 ... xtN -- )
create find-zero dup , 0 do , loop
DOES>
ccount 0 do
dup >r perform
if rdrop unloop exit then
r> cell+
loop ;
: :test :noname ;
: ;test postpone true postpone ; ; immediate
: --> postpone 0= postpone if postpone false postpone exit postpone then ;
immediate
: :default 0 :noname ;
: ;default postpone ;test ; immediate
\ Helper words
: .punctuation ." Punctuation" drop ;
: range 1+ within ;
:default ." Not a character" drop ;default
:test dup bl < --> ." Control char" drop ;test
:test dup [char] 0 [char] 9 range --> ." Digit" drop ;test
:test dup [char] a [char] z range --> ." Lower case letter" drop ;test
:test dup [char] A [char] Z range --> ." Upper case letter" drop ;test
:test dup bl [char] / range --> .punctuation ;test
:test dup [char] : [char] @ range --> .punctuation ;test
:test dup [char] [ [char] ` range --> .punctuation ;test
:test dup [char] { [char] ~ range --> .punctuation ;test
ct: test1
5. Why are the tests upside-down?
: ct: ( 0 xt1 xt2 ... xtN -- )
create find-zero dup , begin dup while 1- dup >r roll , r> repeat drop
DOES>
... ;
0 ( hello again )
:test dup [char] { [char] ~ range --> .punctuation ;test
:test dup [char] [ [char] ` range --> .punctuation ;test
:test dup [char] : [char] @ range --> .punctuation ;test
:test dup bl [char] / range --> .punctuation ;test
:test dup [char] A [char] Z range --> ." Upper case letter" drop ;test
:test dup [char] a [char] z range --> ." Lower case letter" drop ;test
:test dup [char] 0 [char] 9 range --> ." Digit" drop ;test
:test dup bl < --> ." Control char" drop ;test
:test ." Not a character" drop ;test
ct: test1
6. Just so we're not distracted by any residual ugliness of
this example, let's give it a nice test and assume that :TEST
and ;TEST and CT: (now NAMED: ) are cooperating to manage the
stack.
: range:
char postpone literal
char 1+ postpone literal
postpone within ; immediate
1 cells case-table
:test range: { ~ --> .punctuation ;test
:test range: [ ` --> .punctuation ;test
:test range: : @ --> .punctuation ;test
:test range: bl / --> .punctuation ;test
:test range: A Z --> ." Upper case letter" ;test
:test range: a z --> ." Lower case letter" ;test
:test range: 0 9 --> ." Digit" ;test
:test bl < --> ." Control char" ;test
:test ." Not a character" ;test
named: test1
7. So... what's the point of this? You have a table of XTs
for no other purpose than to simulate normal control-flow.
Why not compile all of that into one word, like ANS Forth's
CASE does? And you gave this code in reply to a desire for
efficiency... where does that come in?
8. Is space really a control character?
-- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-30 11:15 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5ccfb957-09cf-4ec3-a6df-fa7800a7fc8a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28169 |
On Thursday, January 30, 2014 3:19:41 AM UTC+2, Julian Fondren wrote: > Because you use RDROP EXIT instead of UNLOOP EXIT ,this crashes on any Forth > where DO..LOOP maintains more than one cell on the return stack. That was a bug leftover from translating the FOR..NEXT to a DO..LOOP. I normally use FOR..NEXT wherever possible. > > 1. Why do you need to pass an explicit size of the table? > This means that any edit to the table requires that this > explicit size also change. You could instead drop a > sentinel on the stack, like 0, and then find it: Yes, it can be redesigned for smarter syntax Like you did. I did want to use :NONAME for the words so I put the XT's on the stack and let CT: eat them up. For that a count on the stack was needed. > > 7. So... what's the point of this? You have a table of XTs > for no other purpose than to simulate normal control-flow. > Why not compile all of that into one word, like ANS Forth's > CASE does? And you gave this code in reply to a desire for > efficiency... where does that come in? The point with the CT: is to demonstrate one way to have arbitrarily complex checks for each branch. The check is in one word and the action in another word. The stack values to be checked are conserved by the condition words and the default word because I have another application where the "TEST1" word is called within a loop and the TOS is an address to be incremented. The TOS should have been dropped on this example. > -- Julian Thanks Julian for refactoring the CT: I will try some of those suggestions. Mikael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-27 13:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Jan27.145730@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #28108 |
"Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> writes:
>Presented with a complex CASE scenario such as the one below, how
>would you and Stephen approach it, assuming it had to be reasonably
>efficient?
>
>hex
>
>: TEST1 ( n ) space
> case
> cond
> 00 1F range
> 7F equal when ." Control char " else
> cond
> 20 2F range
> 3A 40 range
> 5B 60 range
> 7B 7E range when ." Punctuation " else
> cond 30 39 range when ." Digit " else
> cond 41 5A range when ." Upper case letter " else
> cond 61 7A range when ." Lower case letter " else
> drop ." Not a character "
> end-case ;
Assuming you are interested in run-time efficiency over space
efficiency, and with some assumptions about what the non-standard
words mean:
create test1-table $80 cells allot
: range! ( xt u1 u2 -- xt )
1+ swap ?do
dup test1-table i cells + ! loop
drop ;
:noname ." Control char " ; 0 $7f range!
:noname ." Punctuation " ; $20 $7e range!
:noname ." Digit " ; '0' '9' range!
:noname ." Upper case letter " ; 'A' 'Z' range!
:noname ." Lower case letter " ; 'a' 'z' range!
: test1 ( c -- )
dup $7f u> if
drop ." Not a character " exit then
cells test1-table + @ execute ;
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2013: http://www.euroforth.org/ef13/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-28 14:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52e7b833$0$24947$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #28123 |
In article <2014Jan27.145730@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>,
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>"Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> writes:
>>Presented with a complex CASE scenario such as the one below, how
>>would you and Stephen approach it, assuming it had to be reasonably
>>efficient?
>>
>>hex
>>
>>: TEST1 ( n ) space
>> case
>> cond
>> 00 1F range
>> 7F equal when ." Control char " else
>> cond
>> 20 2F range
>> 3A 40 range
>> 5B 60 range
>> 7B 7E range when ." Punctuation " else
>> cond 30 39 range when ." Digit " else
>> cond 41 5A range when ." Upper case letter " else
>> cond 61 7A range when ." Lower case letter " else
>> drop ." Not a character "
>> end-case ;
>
>Assuming you are interested in run-time efficiency over space
>efficiency, and with some assumptions about what the non-standard
>words mean:
>
>create test1-table $80 cells allot
>
>: range! ( xt u1 u2 -- xt )
> 1+ swap ?do
> dup test1-table i cells + ! loop
> drop ;
>
>:noname ." Control char " ; 0 $7f range!
>:noname ." Punctuation " ; $20 $7e range!
>:noname ." Digit " ; '0' '9' range!
>:noname ." Upper case letter " ; 'A' 'Z' range!
>:noname ." Lower case letter " ; 'a' 'z' range!
>
>: test1 ( c -- )
> dup $7f u> if
> drop ." Not a character " exit then
> cells test1-table + @ execute ;
The best solution thus far, I think.
May a break a lance for compile time scripting?
(It is not hard, with carnal knowledge one screenful
for the mechanism, one screenful for the control words.)
"
want -scripting-
create test1-table $80 cells allot
0 \ endsentinel
:noname ." Control char " ; 0 $7f range!
:noname ." Punctuation " ; $20 $7e range!
:noname ." Digit " ; '0' '9' range!
:noname ." Upper case letter " ; 'A' 'Z' range!
:noname ." Lower case letter " ; 'a' 'z' range!
begin dup while
1+ swap ?do dup test1-table i cells + ! loop ( xt) drop
repeat ( endsentinel) drop
: test1 ( c -- )
dup $7f u> if
drop ." Not a character " exit then
cells test1-table + @ execute ;
"
(Also great for creating the tables in a fast crc.)
>- anton
>--
--
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 | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-28 14:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52e7c363$0$24916$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #28153 |
In article <52e7b833$0$24947$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl>,
Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>May a break a lance for compile time scripting?
>(It is not hard, with carnal knowledge one screenful
>for the mechanism, one screenful for the control words.)
>
>"
> want -scripting-
>
> create test1-table $80 cells allot
> 0 \ endsentinel
> :noname ." Control char " ; 0 $7f range!
> :noname ." Punctuation " ; $20 $7e range!
> :noname ." Digit " ; '0' '9' range!
> :noname ." Upper case letter " ; 'A' 'Z' range!
> :noname ." Lower case letter " ; 'a' 'z' range!
>
> begin dup while
> 1+ swap ?do dup test1-table i cells + ! loop ( xt) drop
> repeat ( endsentinel) drop
>
> : test1 ( c -- )
> dup $7f u> if
> drop ." Not a character " exit then
> cells test1-table + @ execute ;
>"
Oops make that:
(Getting rid of the range! word was the point of this exercise.)
"
want -scripting-
create test1-table $80 cells allot
0 \ endsentinel
:noname ." Punctuation " ; $20 $7e
:noname ." Digit " ; '0' '9'
:noname ." Upper case letter " ; 'A' 'Z'
:noname ." Lower case letter " ; 'a' 'z'
/ Default, must be executed first!
:noname ." Control char " ; 0 $7f
begin dup while
1+ swap ?do dup test1-table i cells + ! loop ( xt) drop
repeat ( endsentinel) drop
: test1 ( c -- )
dup $7f u> if
drop ." Not a character " exit then
cells test1-table + @ execute ;
"
>
>(Also great for creating the tables in a fast crc.)
>
>>- anton
>>--
>--
>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
>
--
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 | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-29 10:07 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lc9dd4$2ob$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #28155 |
Albert van der Horst wrote: > ... > Oops make that: > (Getting rid of the range! word was the point of this exercise.) > > " > want -scripting- > > create test1-table $80 cells allot > 0 \ endsentinel > :noname ." Punctuation " ; $20 $7e > :noname ." Digit " ; '0' '9' > :noname ." Upper case letter " ; 'A' 'Z' > :noname ." Lower case letter " ; 'a' 'z' > / Default, must be executed first! > :noname ." Control char " ; 0 $7f > > begin dup while > 1+ swap ?do dup test1-table i cells + ! loop ( xt) drop > repeat ( endsentinel) drop > > : test1 ( c -- ) > dup $7f u> if > drop ." Not a character " exit then > cells test1-table + @ execute ; > " > > > > >(Also great for creating the tables in a fast crc.) Typically it won't be that convenient. Cases won't be sequential making a positional solution wasteful or complicated and :nonames just turn debugging/maintenance into a pain. 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.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-28 21:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <66e2b3ae-f7c4-494a-bf1b-0a710763d8f2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28161 |
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. 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. 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. 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. People who can't program (known as "script kiddies" nowadays), when tasked with a programming problem, will search the internet for some code that somebody else has written that does the job, and use that code. The internet didn't exist when ANS-Forth was getting designed, so Elizabeth Rather just read back issues of "Forth Dimensions" until she found something. What is ironic about this, is that Jeff Fox told me that Elizabeth Rather hated FIG and did everything in her power to discredit FIG --- she really wanted Forth to be proprietary to Forth Inc..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Mauerhofer <smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-29 00:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0733f401-121c-4072-8563-fd47c0d2a642@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28163 |
I was not satisfied with the standard so I've implemented my own CASE statement:
switch: [.. [;case]] {.. case: .. [;case]} ;switch
It expects the number of cases so it can build a jump table for the values 0 to n-1 (n is consumed during compile time). Of course this is not ANS-Forth but it is fast. For those who think it looks too much like C can change the words into
case [.. [endof]] {.. of .. [endof]} endcase
but they have a slightly different meaning, so confusion with ANS-Forth can (and would) occur.
If you don't like the standard solution, make your own.
Forth is more a philosophy or a way of thinking than a standard.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-29 03:37 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <u4ydnXyYiIR-VnXPnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28166 |
Stefan Mauerhofer <smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> wrote: > > Forth is more a philosophy or a way of thinking than a standard. Well, it's both: for those attapeting to communicate it helps to know what words mean. > If you don't like the standard solution, make your own. That's exactly right. One of the bizarre things about this thread is that people have been treating situations where something other than Eaker's CASE is needed as failures of Standard Forth. That's not so, and anyone making such a claim shows a fundamental misunderstanding of Forth. Forth is extensible, and that's a feature, not a bug: if you need a fast indexed CASE you can have one. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-30 21:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dffbe5ea-9dff-4731-97a3-a7eae1c5299a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28167 |
On Wednesday, January 29, 2014 2:37:39 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: > Stefan Mauerhofer <smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> wrote: > > > Forth is more a philosophy or a way of thinking than a standard. > > Well, it's both: for those attapeting to communicate it helps to know > what words mean. When I release my language, it will come with documentation so people will know what the words mean. I'm going to have a document similar the ANS-Forth document, so people who want to implement their own compiler for my language can, and so long as they comply with this document they will be compatible. I'm not going to be like most independent Forth compiler-writers in that the language is just whatever I say it is from day to day --- I will have a core that stays the same, and various extensions that get added on from time to time. > > If you don't like the standard solution, make your own. > > That's exactly right. > > One of the bizarre things about this thread is that people have been > treating situations where something other than Eaker's CASE is needed > as failures of Standard Forth. That's not so, and anyone making such > a claim shows a fundamental misunderstanding of Forth. Forth is > extensible, and that's a feature, not a bug: if you need a fast > indexed CASE you can have one. This is a pretty bizarre attempt at apologizing for the ANS-Forth failure. Eaker's CASE doesn't have any advantage in any situation. It is just a toy. The problem here is that people read the ANS-Forth document and they go away with the idea that all Forth programmers are incompetent. Telling them that they can write their own CASE doesn't really improve that situation --- they think that Forth is a waste of time, and they are just going to ignore it. Another problem is that people who only know ANS-Forth don't necessarily know enough about computer programming to realize how screwed up ANS-Forth is. I learned Forth as my first programming language (well, second after BASIC, but BASIC isn't really a programming language by some accounts). I didn't know about the concept of the jump-table until I learned C and learned about its SWITCH statement. Actually, almost everything I know about computer programming I learned in the context of other programming languages, and then I brought those concepts back to Forth with me. A person who only knows ANS-Forth is going to be ignorant of quite a lot of computer science. Also, writing your own extensions to ANS-Forth isn't all that easy. ANS-Forth is hamstrung by its requirement that everything get compiled at HERE. We have already seen Bernd Payson's ridiculous quotation implementation in which he compiles them into the middle of the creator function with branches compiled around them. The same clunky technique would be necessary for a jump-table case. My language will compile into the heap --- it is possible to pause the compilation of a colon word to compile something else (typically a quotation) and that something else will be somewhere else. The reason why people like Rod claim that C is the "god language" (that term makes me laugh every time I read it) is because C's SWITCH works correctly. This allows C to be used as the engine for a VM. C is routinely used to write Forth interpreters --- they are a lot slower than Forths written in assembly-language, but they are good enough for Anton Ertl's students to do their homework on. C is not the "god language" (well, maybe if Loki is your god) --- C is ugly, clunky and feature-poor. If Forth's CASE statement hadn't been screwed up by the ANS-Forth technical committee, we would be writing C interpreters in Forth rather than Forth interpreters in C (C originally was a VM). If ANS-Forth wasn't so screwed up, we would be writing application programs in Forth too!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-31 18:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xakr75ai5zc71u@localhost> |
| In reply to | #28178 |
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:51:10 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote: > When I release my language, it will come with documentation so people > will know what the words mean. Good. > I'm going to have a document similar the ANS-Forth document, What? Messed up? That's your perspective of the ANS document. You hate ANS but are going to produce a document just like it... Does that make any sense to you? It doesn't to me. Just saying... > I will have a core that stays the same, and various extensions that get > added on from time to time. What if the core is flawed? Keep it? That's what you just said you'd do ... How is that different from any Forth standard? We can't have a NOT which works correctly because we can't decide on what NOT means so we'll give it two other names... Doh! > This is a pretty bizarre attempt at apologizing for the ANS-Forth > failure. Eaker's CASE doesn't have any advantage in any situation. > It is just a toy. > Have you checked Google Groups to make sure your posts are propagating? If they are, do you understand that almost everyone here is ignoring you? No one has replied to any of your last half dozen posts, except one other post by me which you ignored. > The reason why people like Rod claim that C is the "god language" If you're ignoring me, why do you mention me? It's because C is better than every other language I've experienced, and that's well over a dozen. Am I supposed to say C sucks or C is just average, when it is far better than everything else so far? > (that term makes me laugh every time I read it) No one is calling Forth a "god language" around here... > [...] C's SWITCH works correctly. Which one? C has two: structured and unstructured. But, I'd say they both work correctly. > This allows C to be used as the engine for a VM. switch() allows a whole lot of things to be done with sets and ranges of values. It's mostly used because many nested IFs become tedious. > C is routinely used to write Forth interpreters True. > --- they are a lot slower than Forths written in assembly-language True. > C is not the "god language" (well, maybe if Loki is your god) --- > C is ugly, clunky and feature-poor. As compared to what exactly? BASIC, Pascal, Fortran, COBOL, Forth ... That opinion seems arbitrary, carpricious, and uninformed. > If Forth's CASE statement hadn't been screwed up by the ANS-Forth > technical committee, we would be writing C interpreters in Forth No, you wouldn't, nor would anyone else here. It only takes one word to explain why: conceit. Everyone here views Forth as the "god language" but won't say so. So, no one here would *ever* attempt to code C in Forth. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-09 00:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <00qdf91cor7adja0stfrn2nrdnom1hq15e@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #28192 |
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 18:44:19 -0500, "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> wrote: > On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:51:10 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote: <snip> > > [...] C's SWITCH works correctly. > > Which one? C has two: structured and unstructured. But, I'd say > they both work correctly. > Huh? There's only one switch statement in C, and no other construct implements the same semantics. gcc has a nonstandard extension to goto using array of &&label, which can achieve almost the same result, but I see no rational way it can be considered more structured, and standard C doesn't have it at all. > > This allows C to be used as the engine for a VM. > > switch() allows a whole lot of things to be done with sets and ranges of > values. It's mostly used because many nested IFs become tedious. > You can only do (fixed) sets and ranges by writing out all the elements; that 'allows' in a minimalist sense but it doesn't 'help'. switch does usually improve on nested or chained ifs, with latter IME more common.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-09 22:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xa1py8wf5zc71u@localhost> |
| In reply to | #28276 |
On Sun, 09 Feb 2014 00:34:20 -0500, David Thompson
<dave.thompson2@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 18:44:19 -0500, "Rod Pemberton"
> <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> wrote:
>> On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:51:10 -0500, <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > [...] C's SWITCH works correctly.
>>
>> Which one? C has two: structured and unstructured. But, I'd say
>> they both work correctly.
>>
> Huh? There's only one switch statement in C, and no other construct
> implements the same semantics.
It seems that the only time you post to c.l.f. is in regards to
C posts but only those from me. I really don't know why you keep
"attacking" me on C issues ... Do you know anything about Forth?
C supports two forms of switch(). This is not explicitly spelled
out in the C specifications, but it's _true_ nonetheless. It's a
byproduct of how the simple language components of C work together,
and work differently, when they're _not_ present.
The first form is known as a structured switch. It's the form of
switch() that everyone is familiar with. The switch has a body
encompassed by curly braces:
switch(x)
{
case ... :
break;
case ... :
break;
default:
break;
}
This form of switch() can be nested with other switch()'s with bodies.
It's called a structured switch because it isn't generally coded to
jump into other control-flow constructs, although it can be.
switch(x)
{
case ... :
break;
case 0x10 :
switch(x) /* nested */
{
case 0x10 : /* no conflict */
break;
case ... :
break;
default:
break;
}
break;
default:
break;
}
That is nestable, structured switches.
The other form is the unstructured switch. It has no defined body.
Unlike the structured switch(), it isn't nestable. This is because
it has no body. Without a body for each switch, identical case labels
would create a naming conflict. It's unstructured because it "appears"
that it can jump almost anywhere due to placement of the case labels.
This gives it the appearance of unstructured "spaghetti" code. There
is no body to break out of, so use of "break;" should be erroneous.
(The ability for a switch to jump almost anywhere in C is true for the
structured switch too. Although, it's just not generally used. Duff's
device is one such exception, i.e, where used.)
This is the classic example of an unstructured switch(). It's from
Harbison and Steele's "C: A Reference Manual", 3rd Ed. 1991, page 231:
switch(x)
default:
if(prime(x))
case 2: case 3: case 5: case 7:
process_prime(x);
else
case 4: case 6: case 8: case 9: case 10:
process_composite(x);
That is an unstructured switch. 'x' is never 0 or 1. The switch
switches to the case labels for values 2 through 10, thereby bypassing
_some_ of the if() logic. (I.e., 'else' must work correctly for cases
2, 3, 5, and 7, even though a conditional value for if() was never
computed. It's up to the compiler as to whether 'else' is an absolute
branch or a conditional branch using the conditional value for if().)
The switch switches to the default label for values over 10 where the
if() is executed calling prime() and executing one of the if() sections,
respectively.
A similar type of example is Duff's device. It uses a structured
switch(), but it switches into the body of another control-flow
statement, a do()-while block. (I.e., it demonstrates that a
structured switch can jump anywhere the case labels are placed.)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.lang.c/3KFq-67DzdQ/TKl64DiBAGYJ
Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-11 01:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lflolb$qst$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28287 |
Rod Pemberton wrote:
> switch(x)
> {
> case ... :
> break;
> case ... :
> break;
> default:
> break;
> }
Why in the world is the last _break_ needed?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-31 17:44 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4b7906ec-711d-411c-92af-31a398fa369f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28178 |
On Thursday, January 30, 2014 11:51:10 PM UTC-6, hughag...@yahoo.com wrote: > When I release my language, it will come with documentation so people will know what the words mean. I'm going to have a document similar the ANS-Forth document, so people who want to implement their own compiler for my language can, and so long as they comply with this document they will be compatible. I'm not going to be like most independent Forth compiler-writers in that the language is just whatever I say it is from day to day --- I will have a core that stays the same, and various extensions that get added on from time to time. > ... > C is not the "god language" (well, maybe if Loki is your god) --- C is ugly, clunky and feature-poor. If Forth's CASE statement hadn't been screwed up by the ANS-Forth technical committee, we would be writing C interpreters in Forth rather than Forth interpreters in C (C originally was a VM). If ANS-Forth wasn't so screwed up, we would be writing application programs in Forth too! A language should be stable so that other hobbyist system-writers can follow it more easily. An example of Forth's ability to create control-flow syntax is the sole reason that Forth didn't take C's place. One's knowledge of 'Computer Science' is one's familiarity with BASIC and C and possibly other programming languages. That Forth's CASE (a 'go prettier' button for a bunch of IFs) doesn't work like C's switch (a 'go faster' button for a bunch of IFs) is proof that the Forth community actually hadn't heard of this 'C' thing! People learn Forth by reading the ANS Forth standard (so that they can write Forth systems without the distraction of having to learn Forth), so it's from the standard that their impressions of the language and its community are formed. 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? This just has to be a deliberate parody of ANS Forth haters. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-31 16:03 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <9LGdncV0Pa5wyHHPnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28194 |
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*. 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]
Page 18 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web