Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #29282 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-04-04 10:26 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-12-02 04:54 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 432 — 42 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Epic Fail Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-04 10:26 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-04 12:42 -0500
Re: Epic Fail forthisit@gmail.com - 2014-04-04 11:09 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-04 22:09 +0100
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-04 21:44 -1000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-05 09:42 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-05 10:47 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-05 15:25 -0400
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-07 17:29 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 12:35 -0700
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-08 15:54 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-08 12:43 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-09 16:16 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-09 13:00 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-09 21:08 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-09 15:17 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-10 00:17 +0200
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-09 22:42 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Stefan Mauerhofer <smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> - 2014-04-10 00:06 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-10 16:00 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-10 22:35 +0200
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-10 17:51 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Stefan Mauerhofer <smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> - 2014-04-10 21:44 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-11 23:10 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-12 06:18 -0400
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-12 06:23 -0400
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-12 10:52 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.invalid> - 2014-04-12 20:14 +0200
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-12 19:21 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-13 12:25 -0500
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-13 20:33 -0400
Re: Epic Fail stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-04-12 16:12 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-12 09:48 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Stefan Mauerhofer <smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> - 2014-04-12 10:23 -0700
Re: Epic Fail stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-04-12 19:51 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-12 13:00 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-12 10:29 -0700
Re: Epic Fail stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-04-12 19:56 +0000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-13 00:25 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-13 10:50 +0100
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-13 16:53 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.invalid> - 2014-04-14 02:32 +0200
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-13 17:59 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-14 02:00 +0100
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-13 18:30 -0700
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-13 14:21 +0000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-13 21:12 -0700
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-23 12:49 +0000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-28 21:02 -0700
Automatic scoping of locals (was: Epic Fail) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-29 14:49 +0000
Re: Automatic scoping of locals (was: Epic Fail) hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-05-02 22:28 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-10 03:04 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-11 17:23 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-11 21:42 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Spam@ControlQ.com - 2014-04-11 16:13 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-11 22:15 +0200
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-13 16:10 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-13 18:42 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-13 23:44 +0200
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-13 20:33 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-14 04:05 -0500
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-14 09:57 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-14 11:56 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-14 14:53 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-14 07:26 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-14 21:21 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-15 04:07 -0500
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-14 09:55 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-04-14 22:04 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-15 04:10 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-04-15 02:40 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-15 06:41 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-04-15 06:20 -0700
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-15 12:21 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-04-15 06:30 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-15 20:04 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-04-15 23:50 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-15 21:31 -1000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-16 05:55 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-16 14:50 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-04-16 06:06 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-19 17:44 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-20 11:35 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-16 00:19 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-16 05:29 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-16 22:45 -0400
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-14 09:49 +0000
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-23 13:07 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-23 20:16 -0400
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-23 14:41 -1000
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-24 17:10 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Spam@ControlQ.com - 2014-04-24 15:14 -0400
@ and optimization (was: Epic Fail) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-25 08:40 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-25 06:13 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-25 15:26 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-25 09:03 -0700
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-25 17:45 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-25 11:15 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-25 17:22 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 04:38 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-26 11:38 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-26 14:35 +0200
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 09:59 -0500
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 10:14 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-26 15:30 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 12:05 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-26 17:27 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 12:39 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-26 18:07 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-27 03:24 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-27 13:00 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-27 11:18 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-28 15:12 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-29 03:52 -0500
Re: @ and optimization Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-04-29 03:09 -0700
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-29 09:24 -0500
Re: @ and optimization "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-29 08:36 -1000
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-30 10:18 +0000
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-29 14:38 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-29 10:21 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-29 15:41 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-29 12:26 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-30 10:44 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-30 09:18 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-30 17:48 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-01 03:55 -0500
Re: @ and optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-01 14:21 +0200
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-01 10:11 -0500
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-01 14:20 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-01 12:38 -0500
Re: @ and optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-29 20:17 +0200
Re: @ and optimization stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-04-29 19:21 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-29 23:20 +0200
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-30 03:02 -0500
Re: @ and optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-26 20:55 +0200
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-27 03:28 -0500
Re: @ and optimization albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-27 13:31 +0000
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-28 15:27 +0000
Re: @ and optimization albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-27 13:23 +0000
Re: @ and optimization hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-28 21:32 -0700
Re: @ and optimization "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-26 08:50 -0400
Re: @ and optimization "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-26 22:52 +0100
Re: @ and optimization "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-26 20:33 -0400
Re: @ and optimization "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-27 11:53 +0100
Re: @ and optimization "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-28 01:05 -0400
Re: @ and optimization Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-25 21:34 +0100
Re: @ and optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-25 13:37 -0700
Re: @ and optimization Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-25 22:03 +0100
Re: @ and optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-26 15:38 +0000
Re: @ and optimization Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-26 17:24 +0100
Re: @ and optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 04:48 -0500
Re: @ and optimization Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-26 11:09 +0100
Re: @ and optimization (was: Epic Fail) hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-28 21:24 -0700
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-24 19:17 +0000
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-25 08:27 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-25 23:44 +0200
Re: Epic Fail stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-04-26 14:37 +0000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-13 15:04 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-26 09:58 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-26 10:16 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 05:06 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-26 11:16 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-26 03:43 -0700
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-26 14:24 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-26 23:58 -0400
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-27 12:46 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-28 00:41 -0400
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-28 21:54 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-26 17:17 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 10:08 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-26 13:44 +0200
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-26 09:11 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 10:12 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-26 17:00 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 12:08 -0500
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-26 23:41 -0400
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-26 17:06 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-26 12:45 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-26 17:52 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-26 21:52 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-27 03:31 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-27 13:48 +0200
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-27 12:02 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-26 22:19 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-14 10:28 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-14 22:02 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-14 18:57 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-15 05:05 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-14 22:53 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-13 12:34 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-14 13:22 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-14 10:08 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Spam@ControlQ.com - 2014-04-14 11:59 -0400
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-17 16:56 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Spam@ControlQ.com - 2014-04-17 15:16 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-17 23:59 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-18 04:38 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-18 09:17 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-18 11:44 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-18 17:06 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-18 11:41 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-18 16:55 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-18 19:20 +0200
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-20 14:52 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-18 12:21 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-20 14:36 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-20 08:17 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-20 11:35 -0500
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-21 10:51 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-21 19:54 +0200
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-22 17:40 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-22 20:47 +0200
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-19 11:34 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-19 16:05 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-20 12:38 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-20 11:42 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-20 12:11 -0500
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-20 17:23 +0000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-20 11:58 -0700
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-21 10:21 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-22 04:58 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-22 17:05 +0000
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-20 17:12 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-20 19:47 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-22 05:03 -0500
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-22 11:51 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-22 08:28 -0500
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-22 15:02 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-22 13:23 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.invalid> - 2014-04-22 19:19 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Todd Hughes <noemail@dontemailme.org> - 2014-04-10 11:24 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-10 06:55 -0500
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-10 15:50 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-10 11:02 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-10 22:31 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-11 03:55 -0500
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-10 19:08 -0400
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-10 19:03 -0400
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-11 17:45 +0100
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-11 17:16 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-11 18:59 +0100
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-11 19:11 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-11 12:05 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-11 22:03 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-11 20:18 +0200
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-11 21:44 -0400
Re: Epic Fail visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-04-11 14:00 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Matthias Trute <matthias.trute@gmail.com> - 2014-04-12 01:04 -0700
Re: Epic Fail the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2014-11-30 01:47 -0800
Re: Epic Fail the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 16:12 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-04 23:20 +0200
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-07 17:40 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-08 00:52 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assadebrahim2000@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 16:13 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 06:37 +0300
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-09 01:12 +0200
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-08 10:16 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-04 17:41 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-05 02:49 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Hannu Vuolasaho <vuokkosetae@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:46 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-04 21:59 -1000
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-05 08:51 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-05 14:45 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-05 16:01 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-05 19:22 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-06 10:46 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-06 13:20 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-06 19:58 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 12:28 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-06 16:40 -0400
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-06 22:04 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-06 23:25 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-06 23:48 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 15:17 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 00:08 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 15:34 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 00:29 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 16:01 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 00:58 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 16:29 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 01:33 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 01:58 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 19:33 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 04:40 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 04:25 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 20:19 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 11:23 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-07 03:24 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 11:18 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-07 05:20 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 14:49 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-07 08:43 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-07 20:27 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-07 02:57 -0500
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-07 10:00 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-07 16:10 +0200
Re: Epic Fail m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-04-07 07:54 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-07 22:59 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-07 15:07 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-07 15:13 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-08 00:40 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-07 01:02 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 10:49 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-08 19:01 +0100
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-08 08:13 -1000
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-08 20:34 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 12:04 -0700
[OT] Haskell code Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-09 00:42 +0200
Re: [OT] Haskell code Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 18:14 -0700
Re: [OT] Haskell code Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 18:15 -0700
Re: [OT] Haskell code Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-09 03:10 +0200
Re: [OT] Haskell code Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 18:35 -0700
Re: [OT] Haskell code Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-09 03:17 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-06 16:48 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 15:30 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-04-07 11:26 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-07 05:21 -0500
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-07 17:54 +0100
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-07 12:14 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-07 16:49 +0000
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-07 09:37 +0000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-06 08:43 -0700
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-07 12:53 +0000
Re: Epic Fail mhx@iae.nl - 2014-04-06 00:09 -0700
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-06 13:12 +0000
Re: Epic Fail mhx@iae.nl - 2014-04-06 07:55 -0700
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-07 10:18 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 08:21 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-06 08:30 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-06 22:12 +0200
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-06 12:08 -1000
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-06 16:44 -0700
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-06 22:03 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Stefan Mauerhofer <smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> - 2014-04-07 01:29 -0700
locals in nested definitions (was: Epic Fail) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-07 16:57 +0000
Re: Epic Fail mhx@iae.nl - 2014-04-07 11:48 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-07 22:54 +0200
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-08 00:04 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-07 14:12 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-07 21:23 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-07 19:33 -1000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-07 23:52 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> - 2014-04-08 09:07 +0100
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-08 12:35 +0100
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-08 16:21 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-08 16:33 -0400
Re: Epic Fail "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-04-08 23:41 +0100
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-08 22:47 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-08 10:43 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 07:22 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-08 10:12 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 08:58 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-08 08:02 -1000
Re: Epic Fail hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-04-08 23:07 -0700
Re: Epic Fail albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-04-08 10:21 +0000
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-08 15:32 +0200
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-08 17:46 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-09 01:06 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 18:06 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-09 02:56 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-08 18:17 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-04-09 03:24 +0200
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-09 02:22 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 17:07 +0300
Re: Epic Fail the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 03:48 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 07:17 +0300
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-07 22:52 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 03:53 -0700
Re: Epic Fail the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 16:24 -0700
Re: Epic Fail the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 16:45 -0700
Re: Epic Fail kerdezixe@gmail.com - 2014-04-29 11:15 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-04-29 11:21 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-29 20:46 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-04-29 12:27 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-29 23:13 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-04-30 00:04 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-04-30 00:54 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-04-30 23:30 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-04-30 16:48 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-01 03:33 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-05-01 04:04 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-04-30 16:53 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-01 03:56 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-30 03:08 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-04-30 02:30 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-04-30 06:45 -0500
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-04-30 22:02 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-01 04:04 -0500
Re: Epic Fail "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-01 16:08 -0400
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-02 08:12 -0500
Re: Epic Fail Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-05-02 22:33 +0200
Re: Epic Fail Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-05-02 15:19 -0700
Re: Epic Fail Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-03 04:30 -0500
Re: Epic Fail anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-30 09:53 +0000
Forth on JVM (was: Epic Fail) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-04-30 09:24 +0000
Re: Forth on JVM (was: Epic Fail) jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2014-04-30 17:14 -0700
Re: Forth on JVM (was: Epic Fail) jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2014-04-30 17:27 -0700
Re: Forth on JVM (was: Epic Fail) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-05-01 15:25 +0000
Re: Forth on JVM (was: Epic Fail) "Peter Knaggs" <pjk@bcs.org.uk> - 2014-05-03 08:28 +0100
Re: Forth on JVM (was: Epic Fail) "Peter Knaggs" <pjk@bcs.org.uk> - 2014-05-01 07:52 +0100
Re: Forth on JVM Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-05-01 04:06 -0500
Re: Forth on JVM Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2014-05-01 14:28 +0200
Re: Epic Fail AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2014-04-29 20:48 +0200
Re: Epic Fail stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-04-29 19:09 +0000
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-29 09:23 -1000
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-04-29 12:43 -0700
Re: Epic Fail "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-04-29 11:23 -1000
Re: Epic Fail Laurent Laborde <kerdezixe@gmail.com> - 2014-04-29 22:52 -0700
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-11-29 20:13 +0000
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) C G Montgomery <cgm@physics.utoledo.edu> - 2014-11-29 17:15 -0500
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2014-11-29 14:20 -0800
Re: Epic failure awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2014-11-29 23:35 +0100
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-11-30 00:31 +0100
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-11-29 17:41 -0800
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) mhx@iae.nl - 2014-11-30 00:04 -0800
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) mhx@iae.nl - 2014-11-30 00:09 -0800
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-11-30 17:22 +0100
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-11-30 02:13 +0000
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-11-29 18:55 -0800
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-11-30 16:50 +0000
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-12-01 01:22 +0100
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-02 06:00 +0100
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-02 06:37 +0100
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-12-02 12:28 +0000
Re: Epic failure Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-02 18:03 -0800
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2014-12-05 10:10 -0800
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-12-05 16:23 -0500
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-05 13:46 -0800
Re: Epic failure (was Epic Fail) "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-01 07:54 +0000
Re: Epic failure awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2014-12-01 14:02 +0100
Re: Epic failure hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2014-12-01 15:04 -0800
Re: Epic failure awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2014-12-02 04:54 +0100
Page 10 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 22 Next page →
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-27 03:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <_5adnWx9XLHwXcHOnZ2dnUVZ_u2dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #29886 |
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: > Anton Ertl wrote: >> Richard Kenner was the maintainer of 2.8.x, maybe also 2.7.x, but before >> that it was Richard Stallman. > > Kenner was maintainer for GCC 2.5 to GCC 2.8, and then, because the > "everything has to go through the maintainer" bottleneck became a too > obvious problem, the EGCS experiment started (stalling GCC for about 2 years > during the transition). Mmm, but EGCS wasn't stalled, and EGCS became GCC. > http://linuxfinances.info/info/c.html > > IMHO the shoes of RMS were simply too big for Kenner. Well, we hit the "Kenner doesn't scale" problem, but I think we would have hit the same problem with Stallman too. No-one can scale to so many active maintainers. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-27 13:48 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ljiqq3$rrd$1@online.de> |
| In reply to | #29907 |
Andrew Haley wrote: > Well, we hit the "Kenner doesn't scale" problem, but I think we would > have hit the same problem with Stallman too. No-one can scale to so > many active maintainers. Linus apparently has solved that scaling problem. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-27 12:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Apr27.140210@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #29886 |
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> writes:
>Anton Ertl wrote:
>> Richard Kenner was the maintainer of 2.8.x, maybe also 2.7.x, but before
>> that it was Richard Stallman.
>
>Kenner was maintainer for GCC 2.5 to GCC 2.8,
It says so, too, on one of Kenner's own pages:
<http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Richard-Kenner/10200391>.
However, I am pretty sure that the announcement that said that
Stallman is passing the staff to Kenner only came after 2.6.3. And
the effects were quite noticable: instead of the stream of frequent
releases that gcc had seen up to 2.6.3, releases were much rarer in
the 2.7.x series: From 2.0 to 2.6.3 it took less than three years,
from 2.6.3 to 2.8.0 it took more than three years (for dates, see
<http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/releases.html>).
Apparently other people working on gcc were unhappy with this
situation and started egcs, from which came gcc-2.95.
Anyway, my guess is that Stallman still did a lot of work up to 2.6.x,
and then bowed out, and that slowed down development quite a bit.
>IMHO the shoes of RMS were simply too big for Kenner.
Sure, RMS is (or was) a very good and fast programmer, and he was less
averse to complexity than is good for a project that is going to be
maintained by mere mortals, so picking up such a project would have
been a challenge for anyone, including someone of RMS's own calibre,
as maintaining someone else's code is harder than maintaining your
own.
- 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 | Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-26 22:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tg8ol9lcc2bnn66hp45r5338tio1r8olrm@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #29878 |
On Sat, 26 Apr 2014 17:06:24 GMT, anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote: >Assad Ebrahim <assad.ebrahim@alum.swarthmore.edu> writes: >>On Sun, 13 Apr 2014 16:10:30 GMT, anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at >>(Anton Ertl) wrote: >>> >>>Anyway, these are not alternatives. The LLVM maintainers are under >>>the same evil spell as the gcc maintainers >>><http://blog.llvm.org/2011/05/what-every-c-programmer-should-know.html>. >>>The Intel compiler is proprietary. >>> >> >>Thanks for the interesting article reference. >> >>Is the below a fair representation of your and Bernd's point of view? >> >>(A1) we want some of the optimisations that optimising compilers >>produce >> >>(A2) but we don't want them to do so at the expense of taking too >>many liberties with the code >> >>(A3) we'd rather agree that if we want to improve code beyond what a >>non-libertine compiler could legitimately do, then we must take on >>that further improvement ourselves using profilers and targeted >>improvements ourselves. > >Yes, although A1 and A2 are not very precise. More precisely, I want >the optimizations that the Stallman-maintained gcc-2.x did. > >>And would this be a reasonable representation of a ' modern compiler >>maintainer's point of view? >... >>(B2) We're actually not all that interested in C anyway --- what we >>would really like is to be able to take *any* language, transform it >>to a machine independent intermediate language, and then write out >>'optimised' code to any given target machine. So what we're after is >>a universal middle-language, with reasonably sound translators from C, >>Fortran, C++, Objective-C, even Java, maybe even Python, into it, and >>then reasonably sound translators from this middle language into any >>of a vast number of machine languages. > >I would not expect that to have much to do with it. The "undefined >behaviour" in standard C is specific to this standard (with maybe some >crossover with C++). I certainly would not use an IR full of >"undefined behaviour" as a common IR, but would deal with "undefined >behaviour" at a higher level, but then I would not do the things with >"undefined behavuour" that the GCC maintainers are doing. > >However, there is evidence for your idea: 1) Andrew Haley wrote that >-fwrapv came from doing Java. 2) Some older discussions I read >mentioned C++ as justification for miscompiling C; I actually got the >idea that this whole attitude problem is coming from the C++ side. That is my understanding as well. And the problem has gotten more acute in the past 3-4 years. Consider: (from Wikipedia): In May 2010, the GCC steering committee decided to allow use of a C++ compiler to compile GCC.[24] The compiler was intended to be written in C plus a subset of features from C++. In particular, this was decided so that GCC's developers could use the destructors and generics features of C++.[25] In August 2012, the GCC steering committee announced that GCC now uses C++ as its implementation language.[26] This means that to build GCC from sources, a C++ compiler is required that understands C++ 2003. (end quote) So Bjarne Stroustrup seems, at long last, to have got his wish (see the video interview of him which I posted earlier today)... - Assad > >- anton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-14 10:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7xd2gjizvv.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #29613 |
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: > As for tcc, gforth needs register allocation and copy propagation, and > tcc does not do that. What's worse, Fabrice Bellard is no longer > working on it, and while there seem to be people working on it, the > future prospects are unclear. You might have a look at the C compiler that comes with Go (golang.org). Its C dialect is approximately C89, and it is extremely fast. I don't know what optimizations it has, though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-14 22:02 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lihesb$g58$4@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #29643 |
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:28:52 -0700 Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: > > As for tcc, gforth needs register allocation and copy propagation, > > and tcc does not do that. What's worse, Fabrice Bellard is no > > longer working on it, and while there seem to be people working on > > it, the future prospects are unclear. > > You might have a look at the C compiler that comes with Go > (golang.org). Its C dialect is approximately C89, and it is extremely > fast. I don't know what optimizations it has, though. How it can be used as standalone compiler? -- Click OK to continue...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-14 18:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7x4n1vuzfw.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #29648 |
Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> writes: >> C compiler that comes with Go (golang.org). > How it can be used as standalone compiler? http://golang.org/cmd/gc/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-15 05:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lii7mb$hub$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #29652 |
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:57:39 -0700
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> writes:
> >> C compiler that comes with Go (golang.org).
> > How it can be used as standalone compiler?
>
> http://golang.org/cmd/gc/
Well, I wouldn't call this standard C ;)
bmaxa@maxa:~/examples$ cat gohello.c
#include "runtime.h"
void main·init(void) // equivalent to init() function in Go
{
runtime·printf("init\n");
}
// this is the main() function; no argc/argv, and return type is void
void main·main(void)
{
runtime·printf("main\n");
}
bmaxa@maxa:~/examples$ go tool 6c -I /media/Linux/go/src/pkg/runtime gohello.c
bmaxa@maxa:~/examples$ go tool 6l gohello.6
bmaxa@maxa:~/examples$ ./6.out
init
main
--
Click OK to continue...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-14 22:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7x38hfw32w.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #29654 |
Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> writes: > Well, I wouldn't call this standard C ;)... > void main·init(void) // equivalent to init() function in Go I suspect that is for C-Go interoperability, and I have the impression that the C compiler can compile regular C, but I haven't tried using it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-13 12:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <BIednWotufwUV9fOnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #29530 |
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote: >>> Come on, every year we add another workaround against GCC >>> pessimizations that had been added in the newest GCC versions (and >>> when they go away, the result is still worse than before). Code >>> that was fine and fast before. This is a straw man: If GCC really >>> would generate faster code, your argument would have some substance, >>> but in fact, it gets slower and slower, and more difficult to get >>> GCC to compile optimal code. >> >>I don't believe that this is generally true: AIUI code quality is >>measured regularly and is not decreasing. > > Looking at Figure 7 and 8 of > > http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth/ef09/papers/ertl.pdf > > you can see that Gforth 0.6.2 is much slower on newer gccs than on > older ones. Well, yes, but that's GForth, which as discussed is written neither in Standard C or GNU C. > For 0.7.0 we worked around the reasons for these > slowdowns (but did not always succeed), so it does ok on most newer > gcc versions (but not all), but that's not GCC's merit. And yet, even > for 0.7.0 gcc-2.95 is the fastest gcc version on the IA-32 Xeon 5450. > > How do you measure code quality? There's a bunch of industry-standard benchmarks. AFAIK SPECint is the best general-purpose one. > Anyway, the reason why we used gcc is because it was a good way to > combine our goals of portability and efficiency, and to avoid having > to get involved with native-code compilers and their retargeting > issues. If I get involved with writing a native-code compilers, I > will do one for Forth; this is probably much less work than cleaning > up gcc, and it will result in a faster Forth system. Probably. And it might even make GForth into what it should have been in the first place. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-14 13:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Apr14.152248@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #29615 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>>>I don't believe that this is generally true: AIUI code quality is
>>>measured regularly and is not decreasing.
>>
>> Looking at Figure 7 and 8 of
>>
>> http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth/ef09/papers/ertl.pdf
>>
>> you can see that Gforth 0.6.2 is much slower on newer gccs than on
>> older ones.
>
>Well, yes, but that's GForth, which as discussed is written neither in
>Standard C or GNU C.
...
>> How do you measure code quality?
>
>There's a bunch of industry-standard benchmarks. AFAIK SPECint is the
>best general-purpose one.
And SPECint is not written in Standard C, either, as was widely
publicized. As for "GNU C", has the non-standard compliant behaviour
of SPECint been documented as a GNU C feature? If not, then by your
standards, SPECint is not GNU C, either. Or do you use a different
meaning of "written in GNU C"? If so, what is it?
So, since SPECint is written neither in Standard C nor in GNU C (as
you define it), why does it matter whether Gforth is written in
standard C or in GNU C (as you define it).
So you restrict the language that you compile as intended to the
language used in these benchmarks, and you measure the code quality
with these benchmarks. Sounds like a pure benchmark compiler to me.
Pity, it used to be useful.
>> Anyway, the reason why we used gcc is because it was a good way to
>> combine our goals of portability and efficiency, and to avoid having
>> to get involved with native-code compilers and their retargeting
>> issues. If I get involved with writing a native-code compilers, I
>> will do one for Forth; this is probably much less work than cleaning
>> up gcc, and it will result in a faster Forth system.
>
>Probably. And it might even make GForth into what it should have been
>in the first place.
What is that, IYO?
- 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 | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-14 10:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <r7idnU7_fL-fZ9bOnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #29637 |
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: >>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes: >>>>I don't believe that this is generally true: AIUI code quality is >>>>measured regularly and is not decreasing. >>> >>> Looking at Figure 7 and 8 of >>> >>> http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth/ef09/papers/ertl.pdf >>> >>> you can see that Gforth 0.6.2 is much slower on newer gccs than on >>> older ones. >> >>Well, yes, but that's GForth, which as discussed is written neither in >>Standard C or GNU C. > ... >>> How do you measure code quality? >> >>There's a bunch of industry-standard benchmarks. AFAIK SPECint is the >>best general-purpose one. > > And SPECint is not written in Standard C, either, as was widely > publicized. As for "GNU C", has the non-standard compliant behaviour > of SPECint been documented as a GNU C feature? IIRC it turned out that the optimization which broke SPECint wasn't really a useful optimization at all, so there was no point keeping it. If it had been useful, I suppose a switch to disable it would have been added. > If not, then by your standards, SPECint is not GNU C, either. Indeed not. It's a real shame: IMO benchmarks should be written in the standard language. It's not entirely SPEC's fault, given that they didn't write the banchmarks themselves. > So you restrict the language that you compile as intended to the > language used in these benchmarks, and you measure the code quality > with these benchmarks. That's a fair comment, but remember that these are not synthetic benchmarks: they are a wide range of real programs. So, making a compiler perform well on them is not unreasonable. >>Probably. And it might even make GForth into what it should have >>been in the first place. > > What is that, IYO? A Forth system written in Forth. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Spam@ControlQ.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-14 11:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404141156160.45110@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #29640 |
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> Probably. And it might even make GForth into what it should have >>> been in the first place. >> >> What is that, IYO? > > A Forth system written in Forth. > > Andrew. > IIRC, Gforth was originally described as a reference implementation which could run on as many systems as possible. It appears to have grown far beyond the original vision, as the implementation quickly became highly optimized, and the word list extensive. For a C based implementation, it does run very fast on any systems I've run it on. Cheers, Rob.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-17 16:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Apr17.185616@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #29640 |
Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>>>Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>>>> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>>>>>I don't believe that this is generally true: AIUI code quality is
>>>>>measured regularly and is not decreasing.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at Figure 7 and 8 of
>>>>
>>>> http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth/ef09/papers/ertl.pdf
>>>>
>>>> you can see that Gforth 0.6.2 is much slower on newer gccs than on
>>>> older ones.
>>>
>>>Well, yes, but that's GForth, which as discussed is written neither in
>>>Standard C or GNU C.
>> ...
>>>> How do you measure code quality?
>>>
>>>There's a bunch of industry-standard benchmarks. AFAIK SPECint is the
>>>best general-purpose one.
>>
>> And SPECint is not written in Standard C, either, as was widely
>> publicized. As for "GNU C", has the non-standard compliant behaviour
>> of SPECint been documented as a GNU C feature?
>
>IIRC it turned out that the optimization which broke SPECint wasn't
>really a useful optimization at all, so there was no point keeping it.
As evalutated with SPECint, which was broken by the optimization?
Sure.
Meanwhile, the "optimizations" since gcc-2.95 (at
least as a whole, but I suspect, also individually) are not useful for
Gforth 0.7.0, even though it's not broken by them.
>If it had been useful, I suppose a switch to disable it would have
>been added.
I would love to have an optimization option that gives me the gcc-2.x
optimizations and nothing more.
>> If not, then by your standards, SPECint is not GNU C, either.
>
>Indeed not. It's a real shame: IMO benchmarks should be written in
>the standard language. It's not entirely SPEC's fault, given that
>they didn't write the banchmarks themselves.
>
>> So you restrict the language that you compile as intended to the
>> language used in these benchmarks, and you measure the code quality
>> with these benchmarks.
>
>That's a fair comment, but remember that these are not synthetic
>benchmarks: they are a wide range of real programs. So, making a
>compiler perform well on them is not unreasonable.
Indeed, for a compiler that aspires to compile real programs. But
unfortunately I don't see such aspirations in GCC anymore.
Actually, Bernd Paysan wrote IIRC that the way that the SPECint
problem was fixed still breaks the real program that the SPECint
benchmark is based on. If that is the case, you don't get the "real
program" brownie points anyway.
>>>Probably. And it might even make GForth into what it should have
>>>been in the first place.
>>
>> What is that, IYO?
>
>A Forth system written in Forth.
Why do you think that Gforth should have been that in the first place?
If you want a purist Forth systems that is built only with Forth
tools, there are a significant number of them around. No need to turn
Gforth into one of them.
Among Gforth's goals, OTOH, was portability, and it achieved that
portability by using GCC as a portable assembler (among other things).
As a result, Gforth 0.6.2 ran on AMD64 and IA-64 without us having
tested it on these platforms (we did not have them available when we
released Gforth 0.6.2). Actually, even Gforth 0.5.0 (released in
2000) can be built for and then runs on AMD64 (released in 2003) and
IA-64 (introduced in 2001).
So using GCC as a portable assembler was the right decision and a
success. And it would still be the way to go if GCC still was a
reliable portable assembler. Unfortunately, it no longer is, so we
will migrate away from it, but it was good while it lasted.
- 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 | Spam@ControlQ.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-17 15:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404171511200.2392@yoko.controlq.com> |
| In reply to | #29693 |
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014, Anton Ertl wrote: [...] >>> >>> What is that, IYO? >> >> A Forth system written in Forth. > > Why do you think that Gforth should have been that in the first place? > > If you want a purist Forth systems that is built only with Forth > tools, there are a significant number of them around. No need to turn > Gforth into one of them. > > Among Gforth's goals, OTOH, was portability, and it achieved that > portability by using GCC as a portable assembler (among other things). > As a result, Gforth 0.6.2 ran on AMD64 and IA-64 without us having > tested it on these platforms (we did not have them available when we > released Gforth 0.6.2). Actually, even Gforth 0.5.0 (released in > 2000) can be built for and then runs on AMD64 (released in 2003) and > IA-64 (introduced in 2001). > > So using GCC as a portable assembler was the right decision and a > success. And it would still be the way to go if GCC still was a > reliable portable assembler. Unfortunately, it no longer is, so we > will migrate away from it, but it was good while it lasted. > > - anton > Anton, What would constitute a successor to gcc for gforth? Certainly LLVM/Clang is not on enough platforms, and is evolving in its own right. Targetting Java VM's and Parrot make no sense, as they are too far away from the iron that Gforth has traditionally maintained close relations with ... so how might you proceed, and what might constitute a viable replacement? Cheers, Rob.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-17 23:59 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lipisq$244$2@online.de> |
| In reply to | #29694 |
Spam@ControlQ.com wrote: > What would constitute a successor to gcc for gforth? Certainly LLVM/Clang > is not on enough platforms, and is evolving in its own right. Targetting > Java VM's and Parrot make no sense, as they are too far away from the iron > that Gforth has traditionally maintained close relations with ... so how > might you proceed, and what might constitute a viable replacement? Well, we'll bite the bullet and write native code generation for at least the most popular targets. The gcc part won't go away quickly. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-18 04:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7xtx9qamv9.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #29693 |
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: > So using GCC as a portable assembler was the right decision and a > success. And it would still be the way to go if GCC still was a > reliable portable assembler. There's a constituency of C users who considered C to be something like a portable assembler, and another constituency that considered it to be a language for high performance computation on big computers. The standards committee tried to address the desires of both sides, but in some cases, the desires are in conflict, so it wasn't possible to give everyone what they wanted. C is a lousy assembly language anyway, as the C-- doex explain. Maybe there should be something like a C-- front end for GCC.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-18 09:17 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.xeikjw0s6zenlw@localhost> |
| In reply to | #29699 |
On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 07:38:34 -0400, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > C is a lousy assembly language anyway, [...] Having written 75% of a basic operating system in ANSI C for x86 PCs with very minimal assembly, I can't understand how you can make that claim. C captures the essence of microprocessors. I.e., almost everything that general purpose microprocessor instructions do, C can do too. For my OS project, I need a few special x86 instructions to setup the processor mode or access I/O ports, an assembly routine for interrupts to transfer from assembly to C and back, and I support an additional, special startup method that needs assembly. I do use some C library calls, but they're independent of the host. The majority of the code is ANSI C. I.e., those calls will likely be implemented in ANSI C too or rewritten, if I ever have time to return to it. For non-x86 PCs, you'd likely only need the interrupt wrapper, if the C compiler doesn't support an "interrupt" keyword. Non-x86 PCs shouldn't need any special processor instructions. > [...] as the C-- doex explain. Well, I'll have to peruse that yet again to see why... AIR, from what I saw, C-- sucked as an assembly language. I remember thinking you could do what it did in C much easier, in C, with far less syntax. I also recall thinking LLVM had some potential, but I don't recall if that was for use as an assembler or not. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-18 11:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vs-dnSiUiZv4y8zOnZ2dnUVZ8uadnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #29699 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: >> So using GCC as a portable assembler was the right decision and a >> success. And it would still be the way to go if GCC still was a >> reliable portable assembler. > > There's a constituency of C users who considered C to be something like > a portable assembler, and another constituency that considered it to be > a language for high performance computation on big computers. The > standards committee tried to address the desires of both sides, but in > some cases, the desires are in conflict, so it wasn't possible to > give everyone what they wanted. > > C is a lousy assembly language anyway, as the C-- doex explain. Maybe > there should be something like a C-- front end for GCC. It wouldn't be possible with the current structure. C-style paramater passing and stack frames are pretty much baked-in. Andrew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-18 17:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2014Apr18.190654@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #29699 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
>> So using GCC as a portable assembler was the right decision and a
>> success. And it would still be the way to go if GCC still was a
>> reliable portable assembler.
>
>There's a constituency of C users who considered C to be something like
>a portable assembler, and another constituency that considered it to be
>a language for high performance computation on big computers. The
>standards committee tried to address the desires of both sides, but in
>some cases, the desires are in conflict, so it wasn't possible to
>give everyone what they wanted.
According to Andrew Haley, the C standard gives us anything but a
portable assembly language, and if the C standard is interpreted as
the GCC maintainers do it, I agree with him (I just don't think this
is the right way to interpret it).
That narrow view of the C standard also does not cater to high
performance computation on big computers either (whatever you may mean
by that; I usually know "high-performance computing" as a synonym for
"supercomputing" or "scientific computing" etc, i.e. stuff with lots
of FP numbers, but I will assume you mean people who want to get the
maximum speed out of their hardware without dropping to assembly
language): Many idioms used by people who want high performance are
undefined behaviour or somesuch according to the C standard.
The only one that the C standard caters to is people who write Pascal
programs with Java syntax. And apparently optimizing that is the
be-all and end-all of current C compilers. Great, they can optimize
away some induction variables in such programs (while "optimizing"
loops in some other programs into infinite loops), but I don't need
that optimiziation in C! I can eliminate these induction variables in
source code if need be.
>C is a lousy assembly language anyway, as the C-- doex explain.
We certainly make good use of GNU C extensions. Without them, Gforth
would be slower by a factor of about 8 on IA-32 and AMD64 (factor 2
from dynamic superinstructions (based on labels-as-values), factor 2
from direct threading (based on labels-as-values), factor 2 from
explicit register allocation). But with these extensions, C does
nicely.
- 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]
Page 10 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 22 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web