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 4 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 21 Next page →
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-25 20:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1484407a-ee77-4bcd-97b7-3d3225626424@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28083 |
On Friday, January 24, 2014 10:00:47 PM UTC-7, hughag...@yahoo.com wrote: > Testra had a jump-table CASE for UR/Forth for emulation of microprocessors What Testra had was an array of constants, which they did a sequential search of. Then they used that index as the index into an array of jump addresses. The reason why they did this was to save memory; when you are emulating a 16-bit processor on a 16-bit x86, you can't have a gigantic sparsely-populated array. What I said at the time, was that it would be faster if they did a binary search rather than a sequential search. John Hart said that the sequential search was faster because it used SCAS and those string instructions were the key to speed on the 16-bit x86. I doubt that was true, but I didn't really care because I had no intention of using it anyway. The entire time that I worked at Testra, I never used any of their software --- I just wrote everything myself, even when they had software already written that supposedly did what I needed done. > ...ANS-Forth represents itself as the collected wisdom of the whole Forth community --- and this makes the whole Forth community look stupid --- without ANS-Forth we would have to judge Forth programmers individually rather than as a group... Ultimately, this is the problem with ANS-Forth and Forth-200x --- that they require every Forther to be a brainless follower. My language will have true quotations, that have access to the creator function's local variables. I find if very unamusing that Bernd Payson has standardized quotations in Forth-200x which are just syntactic sugar for :NONAME and which are basically useless. This will make it very difficult for me to get people to look at my language --- people will say: "Your leader Bernd Payson has already told us that Forth quotations don't provide access to the creator function's local variables, so we aren't going to waste time looking at Forth ever again, because we already know that Forth sucks."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-10 23:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lfli9o$jjj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #28083 |
hughaguilar96@yahoo.com wrote:
> In the rare cases that I do need a CASE, I will make a
> sub-function and then use a series of IF ... EXIT THEN
> structures. This is more robust because I can work with any
> data type (floats, strings, etc.) rather than just integers,
> and I can make complex tests such as checking for the
> parameter to be within a range, rather than just equality to a
> constant.
I broke your lines for you. Anyone who isn't mindless knows
that he must limit the length of his lines when posting to
usenet.
Ruby:
["foo", "K", "other", "???"].each{|str|
case str
when "foo"
p "It's foo"
when "A" .. "M"
p "Between A and M"
when /^o.*r$/
p "Matches regexp"
else
p "--- no match ---"
end
}
===>
"It's foo"
"Between A and M"
"Matches regexp"
"--- no match ---"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-24 00:44 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e9151d88-435d-4369-9143-a0dcf8cf222e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28033 |
On Thursday, January 23, 2014 6:21:24 PM UTC+1, Anton Ertl wrote: >> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>>Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote: [..] > In my course on efficient programs, this year the students > have to optimize a program that mainly uses flex, which > generates switch statements. A number of students optimized > the resulting program by reordering the cases of the switch > statement; [..] Do you give your students a test program where a fast CASE really matters? I would be interested. I did a quick test and found 1400 CASE statements in the iForth example database. A very large proportion of them deal with (formatting) I/O, and very many of them print something in the default case or ABORT there. If one is sufficiently aggressive it is possible to write something like: FORTH> : test case 33 of 33 + endof 44 of 66 - endof endcase ; ok FORTH> see test Flags: TOKENIZE, ANSI : test CASE 33 OF 33 + ENDOF 44 OF 66 - ENDOF ENDCASE ; ok FORTH> : tt 22 33 test . ; ok FORTH> see tt Flags: ANSI $0121F3C0 : tt $0121F3CA cmp rbx, rbx $0121F3CD push #22 b# $0121F3CF mov rdi, #33 d# $0121F3D6 mov rcx, rdi $0121F3D9 mov rbx, rcx $0121F3DC jne $0121F3ED offset NEAR $0121F3E2 pop rbx $0121F3E3 lea rbx, [rbx #33 +] qword $0121F3E7 push rbx $0121F3E8 jmp $0121F402 offset NEAR $0121F3ED cmp rbx, #44 b# $0121F3F1 jne $0121F402 offset NEAR $0121F3F7 pop rbx $0121F3F8 lea rbx, [rbx #-66 +] qword $0121F3FC push rbx $0121F3FD jmp $0121F402 offset NEAR $0121F402 jmp .+10 ( $0113A8AA ) offset NEAR $0121F407 ; -marcel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-24 09:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Jan24.102047@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #28047 |
m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl writes:
>On Thursday, January 23, 2014 6:21:24 PM UTC+1, Anton Ertl wrote:
>>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>>>>Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
>[..]
>> In my course on efficient programs, this year the students
>> have to optimize a program that mainly uses flex, which
>> generates switch statements. A number of students optimized
>> the resulting program by reordering the cases of the switch
>> statement;
>[..]
>Do you give your students a test program where a fast CASE
>really matters?
Flex generates C code, so a fast Eaker's CASE does not come into play
for this task. I would expect a Forth scanner generator to generate
something involving EXECUTE rather than Eaker's CASE. Hmm, Gray
originally generated an IF-ELSE cascade for the alternative construct
'(( ... || ... || ... || ... ))', but now it generates a decision
tree.
- 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 | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-23 10:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52e0e7ec.173058960@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #28011 |
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 14:28:25 -1000, "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> wrote: >Back in the stone ages, the Forth Interest Group held a contest for a >case statement. This version, contributed by a man named Eaker, won. >Everyone ever since has hated the fact that ENDCASE does a drop (believe >me, *everyone* makes this mistake at lease once), but we were all so >burned by the gratuitous changes made by Forth83 (discussed in the "PICK >changed..." thread) that no one has dared change it. Yes, but it's not just "at least once", it's "at least at an embarrassing moment". For all its technical faults, the Eaker CASE structure reads well. By the time of the ANS standard, it was the most common multiple-choice structure, so confirming it made sense for a committee that respected common practice. Stephen -- Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time 133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691 web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-23 09:05 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <NZudnX4PcvZn-nzPnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28016 |
On 1/23/2014 12:02 AM, Stephen Pelc wrote: > On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 14:28:25 -1000, "Elizabeth D. Rather" > <erather@forth.com> wrote: > >> Back in the stone ages, the Forth Interest Group held a contest for a >> case statement. This version, contributed by a man named Eaker, won. >> Everyone ever since has hated the fact that ENDCASE does a drop (believe >> me, *everyone* makes this mistake at lease once), but we were all so >> burned by the gratuitous changes made by Forth83 (discussed in the "PICK >> changed..." thread) that no one has dared change it. > > Yes, but it's not just "at least once", it's "at least at an > embarrassing moment". For all its technical faults, the Eaker > CASE structure reads well. By the time of the ANS standard, it > was the most common multiple-choice structure, so confirming it > made sense for a committee that respected common practice. Yes, it was very widespread common practice, and it wouldn't have been either popular or responsible to have replaced or "fixed" it. People should order their cases if they have a good sense of what choices will occur most often. And jump tables are an easy-to-implement alternative if the application warrants it, particularly if the selector can be used to compute an index into the table. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-27 00:43 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lc33gp$549$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #28037 |
Elizabeth D Rather wrote:
> On 1/23/2014 12:02 AM, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 14:28:25 -1000, "Elizabeth D. Rather"
> > <erather@forth.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Back in the stone ages, the Forth Interest Group held a contest for a
> >> case statement. This version, contributed by a man named Eaker, won.
> >> Everyone ever since has hated the fact that ENDCASE does a drop (believe
> >> me, *everyone* makes this mistake at lease once), but we were all so
> >> burned by the gratuitous changes made by Forth83 (discussed in the "PICK
> >> changed..." thread) that no one has dared change it.
> >
> > Yes, but it's not just "at least once", it's "at least at an
> > embarrassing moment". For all its technical faults, the Eaker
> > CASE structure reads well. By the time of the ANS standard, it
> > was the most common multiple-choice structure, so confirming it
> > made sense for a committee that respected common practice.
>
> Yes, it was very widespread common practice, and it wouldn't have been
> either popular or responsible to have replaced or "fixed" it.
>
> People should order their cases if they have a good sense of what
> choices will occur most often. And jump tables are an easy-to-implement
> alternative if the application warrants it, particularly if the selector
> can be used to compute an index into the table.
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 ;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-26 18:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <52e54d17.461102185@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #28108 |
On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 00:43:23 +1100, "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> 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 ; I could answer that if I kew what your words do. CASE COND EQUAL RANGE WHEN END-CASE Stephen -- Stephen Pelc, stephenXXX@mpeforth.com MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time 133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691 web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mhx@iae.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-26 11:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <45cde960-5d27-4135-b757-8123f7bce529@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28109 |
On Sunday, January 26, 2014 7:04:51 PM UTC+1, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 00:43:23 +1100, "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
[..]
anew -when
: cond ( char -- 0 char ) 0 SWAP ;
: range ( flag1 char low hi -- flag2 char ) 2 PICK >R 1+ WITHIN OR R> ;
: equal ( flag1 char val -- flag2 ) OVER >R = OR R> ;
: when ( flag char -- char ) POSTPONE TUCK POSTPONE AND POSTPONE OF ; IMMEDIATE COMPILE-ONLY
: TEST1 ( char -- )
space
case
cond
00 $1F range
$7F equal when ." Control char " endof
cond
BL '/' range
':' '@' range
'[' &` range
'{' '~' range when ." Punctuation " endof
cond '0' '9' range when ." Digit " endof
cond 'A' 'Z' range when ." Upper case letter " endof
cond 'a' 'z' range when ." Lower case letter " endof
drop ." Not a character "
endcase ;
-marcel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-26 22:09 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <bbhdsd3vq4le.tn5ugziwkcqn$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #28111 |
Op Sun, 26 Jan 2014 11:27:26 -0800 (PST) schreef mhx@iae.nl:
> On Sunday, January 26, 2014 7:04:51 PM UTC+1, Stephen Pelc wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 00:43:23 +1100, "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
> [..]
> anew -when
>: cond ( char -- 0 char ) 0 SWAP ;
>: range ( flag1 char low hi -- flag2 char ) 2 PICK >R 1+ WITHIN OR R> ;
>: equal ( flag1 char val -- flag2 ) OVER >R = OR R> ;
>: when ( flag char -- char ) POSTPONE TUCK POSTPONE AND POSTPONE OF ; IMMEDIATE COMPILE-ONLY
>
>: TEST1 ( char -- )
> space
> case
> cond
> 00 $1F range
> $7F equal when ." Control char " endof
> cond
> BL '/' range
> ':' '@' range
> '[' &` range
> '{' '~' range when ." Punctuation " endof
> cond '0' '9' range when ." Digit " endof
> cond 'A' 'Z' range when ." Upper case letter " endof
> cond 'a' 'z' range when ." Lower case letter " endof
> drop ." Not a character "
> endcase ;
>
> -marcel
Superfluous DROP in the default case ;-)
--
Coos
CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications
http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-26 15:35 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <9YadnTawsZA04njPnZ2dnUVZ8oqdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28111 |
create 'kinds
0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c,
0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c, 0 c,
1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c,
2 c, 2 c, 2 c, 2 c, 2 c, 2 c, 2 c, 2 c, 2 c, 2 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c,
1 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c,
3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 3 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c,
1 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c,
4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 4 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 1 c, 0 c,
: kind ( n - kind)
dup 80 u< if 'kinds + c@ else 5 then ;
: ,names
c" Control char " ,
c" Punctuation " ,
c" Digit " ,
c" Upper case letter " ,
c" Lower case letter " ,
c" Not a character " ,
;
create names ,names
: test1 ( n) space
kind cells names + @ count type ;
Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-29 01:57 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lc8gk0$fb7$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #28111 |
mhx@iae.nl wrote:
> On Sunday, January 26, 2014 7:04:51 PM UTC+1, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 00:43:23 +1100, "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
> [..]
> anew -when
> : cond ( char -- 0 char ) 0 SWAP ;
> : range ( flag1 char low hi -- flag2 char ) 2 PICK >R 1+ WITHIN OR R> ;
> : equal ( flag1 char val -- flag2 ) OVER >R = OR R> ;
> : when ( flag char -- char ) POSTPONE TUCK POSTPONE AND POSTPONE OF ; IMMEDIATE COMPILE-ONLY
>
> : TEST1 ( char -- )
> space
> case
> cond
> 00 $1F range
> $7F equal when ." Control char " endof
> cond
> BL '/' range
> ':' '@' range
> '[' &` range
> '{' '~' range when ." Punctuation " endof
> cond '0' '9' range when ." Digit " endof
> cond 'A' 'Z' range when ." Upper case letter " endof
> cond 'a' 'z' range when ." Lower case letter " endof
> drop ." Not a character "
> endcase ;
Good. (It wasn't necessary to emulate cond/equal/when etc but no matter.)
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.
A short example to illustrate:
: TEST ( n )
case
cond
1 equal
3 equal
5 equal
7 equal
9 equal when ." Selected"
else
." Not in range"
endcase ;
Using your implementation and VFX (old demo) it compiles to:
see test
TEST
( 004AC320 53 ) PUSH EBX
( 004AC321 83FB01 ) CMP EBX, 01
( 004AC324 0F94C3 ) SETZ/E BL
( 004AC327 F6DB ) NEG BL
( 004AC329 0FBEDB ) MOVSX EBX, BL
( 004AC32C 83CB00 ) OR EBX, 00
( 004AC32F 5A ) POP EDX
( 004AC330 52 ) PUSH EDX
( 004AC331 83FA03 ) CMP EDX, 03
( 004AC334 0F94C2 ) SETZ/E DL
( 004AC337 F6DA ) NEG DL
( 004AC339 0FBED2 ) MOVSX EDX, DL
( 004AC33C 0BDA ) OR EBX, EDX
( 004AC33E 5A ) POP EDX
( 004AC33F 52 ) PUSH EDX
( 004AC340 83FA05 ) CMP EDX, 05
( 004AC343 0F94C2 ) SETZ/E DL
( 004AC346 F6DA ) NEG DL
( 004AC348 0FBED2 ) MOVSX EDX, DL
( 004AC34B 0BDA ) OR EBX, EDX
( 004AC34D 5A ) POP EDX
( 004AC34E 52 ) PUSH EDX
( 004AC34F 83FA07 ) CMP EDX, 07
( 004AC352 0F94C2 ) SETZ/E DL
( 004AC355 F6DA ) NEG DL
( 004AC357 0FBED2 ) MOVSX EDX, DL
( 004AC35A 0BDA ) OR EBX, EDX
( 004AC35C 5A ) POP EDX
( 004AC35D 52 ) PUSH EDX
( 004AC35E 83FA09 ) CMP EDX, 09
( 004AC361 0F94C2 ) SETZ/E DL
( 004AC364 F6DA ) NEG DL
( 004AC366 0FBED2 ) MOVSX EDX, DL
( 004AC369 0BDA ) OR EBX, EDX
( 004AC36B 5A ) POP EDX
( 004AC36C 23DA ) AND EBX, EDX
( 004AC36E 3BDA ) CMP EBX, EDX
( 004AC370 8BDA ) MOV EBX, EDX
( 004AC372 7516 ) JNZ/NE 004AC38A
( 004AC374 8B5D00 ) MOV EBX, [EBP]
( 004AC377 8D6D04 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+04]
( 004AC37A E87D05F6FF ) CALL 0040C8FC (.") "Selected"
( 004AC388 EB18 ) JMP 004AC3A2
( 004AC38A E86D05F6FF ) CALL 0040C8FC (.") "Not in range"
( 004AC39C 8B5D00 ) MOV EBX, [EBP]
( 004AC39F 8D6D04 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+04]
( 004AC3A2 C3 ) NEXT,
( 131 bytes, 47 instructions )
Were one to use the Case statements provided in other languages one could
expect to see something like this:
see test
TEST
( 004AC730 83FB01 ) CMP EBX, 01
( 004AC733 7416 ) JZ/E 004AC74B
( 004AC735 83FB03 ) CMP EBX, 03
( 004AC738 7411 ) JZ/E 004AC74B
( 004AC73A 83FB05 ) CMP EBX, 05
( 004AC73D 740C ) JZ/E 004AC74B
( 004AC73F 83FB07 ) CMP EBX, 07
( 004AC742 7407 ) JZ/E 004AC74B
( 004AC744 83FB09 ) CMP EBX, 09
( 004AC747 7402 ) JZ/E 004AC74B
( 004AC749 EB17 ) JMP 004AC762
( 004AC74B 8B5D00 ) MOV EBX, [EBP]
( 004AC74E 8D6D04 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+04]
( 004AC751 E8A601F6FF ) CALL 0040C8FC (.") "Selected"
( 004AC760 EB18 ) JMP 004AC77A
( 004AC762 E89501F6FF ) CALL 0040C8FC (.") "Not in range"
( 004AC774 8B5D00 ) MOV EBX, [EBP]
( 004AC777 8D6D04 ) LEA EBP, [EBP+04]
( 004AC77A C3 ) NEXT,
( 75 bytes, 19 instructions )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mhx@iae.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-28 13:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <75908222-ead4-4234-887c-4d00b8cc6179@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28156 |
On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 3:57:32 PM UTC+1, Ed wrote: [..] > 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. [..] My answer was not meant for speed: Wil Baden's example uses I/O and optimization is out of place. Actually, Wil's example is unique in that it is the only one I know that has such a complicated case :-) What I wanted to demonstrate is that ANS CASE is flexible enough to admit trivially short user-defined cond, range and when, in case the need arises. W.r.t speed one uses Andrew's or Anton's jump table. It guarantees only a single branch is needed. Your example needs 5 in the worst case. One other possibility that is close to yours uses EXIT to separate decision and action. I normally use that one when I want some speed but not the hassle of building a jumptable (YMMV). -marcel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-28 12:12 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <somdnRAxQOmltnXPnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28159 |
On 1/28/14 11:46 AM, mhx@iae.nl wrote: > On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 3:57:32 PM UTC+1, Ed wrote: > [..] >> 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. > [..] > My answer was not meant for speed: Wil Baden's example uses I/O and > optimization is out of place. Actually, Wil's example is unique in > that it is the only one I know that has such a complicated case :-) > What I wanted to demonstrate is that ANS CASE is flexible enough > to admit trivially short user-defined cond, range and when, in case > the need arises. > > W.r.t speed one uses Andrew's or Anton's jump table. It > guarantees only a single branch is needed. Your example > needs 5 in the worst case. > > One other possibility that is close to yours uses EXIT to > separate decision and action. I normally use that one when I > want some speed but not the hassle of building a jumptable (YMMV). Yes, CASE is appropriate for a certain class of situations, but at best is only one tool in what should be a large toolchest. You select the decision process that's best suited to the situation at hand. 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 | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-30 17:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Jan30.181949@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #28159 |
mhx@iae.nl writes:
>One other possibility that is close to yours uses EXIT to
>separate decision and action. I normally use that one when I
>want some speed but not the hassle of building a jumptable (YMMV).
Can you elaborate on that?
- 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 | "Ed" <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-01 00:40 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lcg97v$iv2$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #28159 |
mhx@iae.nl wrote: > On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 3:57:32 PM UTC+1, Ed wrote: > [..] > > 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. > [..] > My answer was not meant for speed: It was needlessly slower. > Actually, Wil's example is unique in > that it is the only one I know that has such a complicated case :-) Then you haven't been around much :) We're talking facilities supported by virtually every language which has a case statement. > What I wanted to demonstrate is that ANS CASE is flexible enough > to admit trivially short user-defined cond, range and when, in case > the need arises. You have demonstrated ANS CASE falls short of industry best practice. > W.r.t speed one uses Andrew's or Anton's jump table. It > guarantees only a single branch is needed. Jump tables are a red-herring and a distraction. If jump tables were the answer then every ANS CASE implementation would be based upon them. But they're not. GForth employs an IF/ELSE based CASE statement. A search of the GForth distribution files reveals in excess of 300 uses of ENDOF. Surely those who promote jump tables over IF/ELSE constructs should be using them. But they don't. Given the reality of IF/ELSE based CASE statements in Forth, I see no good reason to accept such a mediocre one as ANS supplied.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-31 06:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b2ca9991-4cfe-4102-a104-2e82e9f79168@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28181 |
Regarding jump tables, how do they work when:
a) The values being tested are not consecutive values?
b) The test values are not numeric literals, rather they are expressions (words) to be evaluated?
Trivial example:
: zero 0 ;
: one 1 ;
: test ( 0|1 -- )
case
zero of ." zero" endof
one of ." one" endof
endcase
;
This works fine with Eaker's CASE implementation. I consider it to be powerful for that reason. It can do more than evaluate a list of literals, just as can be done in c.
I imagine the above would be non-trivial using jump tables. Clearly, it has been done, since modern c compilers use the jump table technique, but the complexity of it (at least as I see it) seems rub against the Forth grain, somewhat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-31 12:13 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <KbKdna1T0cpbenbPnZ2dnUVZ_o6dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28182 |
Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > I imagine the above would be non-trivial using jump tables. Clearly, > it has been done, since modern c compilers use the jump table > technique, Actually not: C's switch requires literals. Quite right, too. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-31 08:36 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <EKqdnW1ftf62cHbPnZ2dnUVZ_h-dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #28182 |
On 1/31/14 4:33 AM, Mark Wills wrote: > Regarding jump tables, how do they work when: > > a) The values being tested are not consecutive values? > b) The test values are not numeric literals, rather they are expressions (words) to be evaluated? > a) You can have "holes" in your table, set to a default response. b) You have to evaluate them in such a way as to return an appropriate value. But the real answer is that it's inappropriate to argue for jump tables vs. a CASE statement in any global sense, because each is optimized for a different scenario. A jump table will work well for a situation in which the selectors form a sequential or dense set; a CASE works well when the selectors are arbitrary (i.e., not a dense or sequential set). The Eaker CASE works fine (once you get used to the fact that ENDCASE DROPs) for a lot of situations, such as finding one of the three THROW code you wish to respond to in a particular scenario, while a jump table is great for responding to the pushbuttons on a device, for instance. Both are easy to manage in Forth, and should be in every programmer's toolset. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-01 00:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <baa5575a-d457-4cbf-924d-9842f65d1f67@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #28188 |
On Friday, January 31, 2014 11:36:27 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 1/31/14 4:33 AM, Mark Wills wrote: > > Regarding jump tables, how do they work when: > > > a) The values being tested are not consecutive values? > > b) The test values are not numeric literals, rather they are expressions (words) to be evaluated? > > a) You can have "holes" in your table, set to a default response. For example, if you are emulating a 16-bit micro-controller, the 16-bit opcodes are not all going to be sequential; they are going to be scattered all over the 64K range. The result is that your jump-table is 64K but it is sparsely populated; there are only 300 or 400 valid opcodes and the rest of the pointers are to a function that aborts with a message such as: "invalid opcode." As I mentioned previously, Testra didn't do this because in the early 1990s the computer they were using didn't have enough memory for a gigantic sparsely-populated table. What they did was have two tables. The first table contained all the valid opcodes. They did a search on this (using SCAS, although I would have used a binary search). Then they used the index of the found match as the index into the second table. This was a jump table containing xt values (we called them cfa values in those days). > b) You have to evaluate them in such a way as to return an appropriate > value. That isn't true. The jump table only works when comparing an integer to a set of constants. There is no good way to convert a float or a string into an "appropriate value" (an integer). You could try to hash it, but that is a bad idea. For one thing, there is no guarantee that your hash values are going to be unique. For another thing, the hash value is going to be 32-bit or even 64-bit, and you can't have that big of a jump-table. If you are working with integers and your integers are in a small range, you can use your integer as a index in your jump-table. A 64K jump-table is about as big as you would want, even on modern computers that have gigabytes of memory. Not only is a gigantic sparsely-populated table a waste of memory, but it also causes a lot of data-cache thrashing (the data-cache on the x86 is only 32KB). Otherwise, you should use the technique describes above in which you do a look-up in one table and then use that index into your jump-table. This works when you have integers that are scattered over a large range. This also works when you have floats or strings or whatever. If you have "expressions to be evaluated," then CASE isn't going to work at all. The only solution is a series of IF statements. As I said before, the way to do this is to put your series of IF statements in a function by themselves. End each IF with an EXIT THEN (by comparison, in Eaker's CASE each IF ends with a BRANCH to just past the ENDOF). The IF ... EXIT THEN technique is what I do routinely (I have NEVER used the ANS-Forth CASE). > But the real answer is that it's inappropriate to argue for jump tables > vs. a CASE statement in any global sense, because each is optimized for > a different scenario. A jump table will work well for a situation in > which the selectors form a sequential or dense set; a CASE works well > when the selectors are arbitrary (i.e., not a dense or sequential set). > The Eaker CASE works fine (once you get used to the fact that ENDCASE > DROPs) for a lot of situations, such as finding one of the three THROW > code you wish to respond to in a particular scenario, while a jump table > is great for responding to the pushbuttons on a device, for instance. > Both are easy to manage in Forth, and should be in every programmer's > toolset. This isn't true either. Eaker's CASE is not optimized for any scenario. It is really worthless --- it does not belong in any programmers toolset, and it definitely doesn't belong in the ANS-Forth standard. If I were an employer and was interviewing candidates for a Forth-programming job, I would ask them to give examples of how ANS-Forth CASE statement should be used. It is a trick question! If they give examples of how it should be used, then I would tell them that they are unqualified to work for me. If they say that there are no examples of how it should be used, then the interview continues. Elizabeth Rather would not be qualified to work as a Forth programmer by my standards. None of the ANS-Forth technical committee are qualified to work as Forth programmers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web