Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #31555 > unrolled thread
| Started by | JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-06-15 07:06 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-08-12 03:51 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 143 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-06-15 07:06 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-06-15 08:48 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-06-15 23:43 +0100
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-06-15 19:44 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-06-16 02:21 +0200
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-06-16 09:26 +0100
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-06-17 04:06 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2014-06-15 19:39 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-06-15 23:01 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-17 09:27 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-17 20:12 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-17 21:15 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-17 22:34 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-17 23:11 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-18 16:57 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-06-20 05:03 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-20 14:56 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-20 17:03 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-20 17:53 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-21 10:57 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-21 11:06 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-21 13:30 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-21 11:58 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-21 14:22 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-21 20:13 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-21 21:54 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX bruce.mcfarling@gmail.com - 2014-06-21 22:31 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-06-22 05:31 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-22 07:04 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-22 18:02 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-06-23 02:53 +0200
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-22 20:29 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-06-22 13:40 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-22 12:08 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX november.nihal@gmail.com - 2014-06-22 16:03 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-22 20:30 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-26 15:17 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-26 15:51 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-26 22:49 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-27 07:32 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-27 23:01 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-28 06:59 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-06-28 08:07 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-28 08:34 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-28 07:23 -1000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-28 22:46 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-07-27 02:06 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2014-07-28 07:31 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-07-28 11:23 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-07-28 19:21 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2014-07-28 20:59 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-07-29 11:10 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-07-29 09:45 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2014-07-29 07:44 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-07-29 17:48 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-07-29 11:14 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX mhx@iae.nl - 2014-07-29 12:57 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-07-29 18:36 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2014-07-29 20:38 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-07-29 21:43 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2014-07-29 23:05 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-07-30 22:20 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2014-07-31 00:19 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-07-30 01:41 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-07-30 21:42 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-07-31 01:08 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-07-31 20:25 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-08-01 02:23 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-08-01 12:54 +0200
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-08-01 19:57 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-08-02 04:18 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-07-27 02:14 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX bruce.mcfarling@gmail.com - 2014-06-21 21:59 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-06-21 22:36 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-21 22:44 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-06-22 02:26 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-22 07:41 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-22 07:43 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-22 19:57 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-24 21:04 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-24 15:21 -1000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-25 18:21 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-06-25 03:16 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2014-06-25 12:08 +0300
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-06-25 14:08 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2014-06-25 19:13 +0300
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-06-25 17:14 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2014-06-25 21:03 +0300
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-06-26 12:13 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-06-25 16:14 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-06-25 17:27 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-25 18:24 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-06-26 03:27 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-26 17:50 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-06-27 03:13 -0500
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-06-27 12:30 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-06-25 03:46 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-06-25 16:15 +0000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-25 13:19 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-25 18:52 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-06-26 10:45 +0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2014-06-26 09:56 +0300
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Alexander Skobelev <al.skobelev@gmail.com> - 2014-06-26 11:30 +0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-25 18:38 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-25 20:49 -1000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-26 17:54 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2014-07-26 21:53 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Julian Fondren <ayrnieu@gmail.com> - 2014-06-22 22:22 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-23 07:31 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-24 17:05 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-24 20:55 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-24 19:52 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-25 13:09 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2014-06-23 00:17 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2014-06-23 00:27 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-23 07:45 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-23 07:54 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2014-06-24 00:56 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-06-27 03:33 +0200
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-25 18:20 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-25 18:50 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-25 20:00 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-25 23:02 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-06-26 10:28 +0100
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-26 07:56 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-06-26 07:59 -1000
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-26 17:33 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-26 17:26 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-26 17:22 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-18 22:07 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-06-18 19:28 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX mhx@iae.nl - 2014-06-18 23:09 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-18 20:02 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-19 18:28 -0400
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-06-17 21:01 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX mhx@iae.nl - 2014-06-17 23:01 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX jyf <jyf1987@gmail.com> - 2014-06-19 22:13 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> - 2014-06-19 22:34 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX brelliott18@hotmail.com - 2014-08-10 09:15 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-08-11 14:31 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-08-11 23:51 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX brelliott18@hotmail.com - 2014-08-12 03:14 -0700
Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2014-08-12 03:51 -0700
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-27 23:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ede5ea0c-5900-4a2a-a99f-fa518ed03c09@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #31943 |
On Friday, June 27, 2014 7:32:20 AM UTC-7, Roger Levy wrote: > > The FODs want you to cut-and-paste all of time, not just "sometimes." To some extent, ANS-Forth's lack of support for general-purpose reusable libraries is due to ignorance on the part of the leadership --- but to some extent this was done on purpose --- this is a FOD plot to force cut-and-paste programming on everybody, so the FODs can maintain their position at the top by restricting access to the old programs that new programs get remixed from, largely preventing FNGs from writing programs without the FODs permission. > > > This FOD plot is what I've seen in machining in regard to CNC. When I see the same thing being done in Forth, I get riled up --- Forth is sacred ground --- but the FODs are pushing Forth down the same path that COBOL trod, for the same purpose (greed), to the same inglorious end in which nobody under the age of 40 will volunteer to be an FNG. > > > Cut-and-paste programming is representative of the end of innovation, and a descent into purely backward-looking stagnation. FOD-stasis isn't just a problem for Forth --- it is a problem for civilization. > That's a really interesting theory, and similar to thoughts I've had. It is a fact that I had to teach myself what the past generation learned through years of experience, or maybe by standing on the shoulders of their predecessors, and basically kept to themselves. Not just in Forth but in practically everything. I don't think it was conscious though. As I get older and spend more time around boomers in the professional field I see that a lot of them don't really know What's Going On and by all accounts just Did Their Best. And for some reason, that generation was not equipped to see too far beyond themselves until the final hour. Maybe all the previous generations didn't really think too far ahead beyond their immediate pressures. C'est la vie. > Maybe the failure to pass on knowledge isn't even special to the boomers. Think of exactly how many people each generation write publications that survive into decades after their death, versus how many people were in that generation, and much of that knowledge gets misconstrued by how many people. Maybe it's that human beings just suck, or maybe it's western civilization and our over-reliance on technology, or maybe it's just overpopulation. I have no idea what you are talking about. Failure to pass on knowledge? Over-population? What??? What I am talking about is how the FODs plot to make themselves indispensable. It is common in a company that new programs are similar to old programs, especially for the same customer. The FODs restrict FNG access to those previous programs. The FNG who needs to write a program similar to a previous program, has to write the entire thing from scratch. This takes more time than modifying the old program, so the FOD looks like a super-programmer to the boss, compared to the FNG. Typically, the FNG has to ask the FOD to provide him with the old program from the secret archive --- the cost for this help is that the FNG has to do a lot of brown-nosing of the FOD in front of the boss (and sometimes pay the FOD cash under the table). The FNG still takes longer than the FOD to modify the program, because he has to figure out how the program works before he can make the modification, and the program is not documented (or, if it does have documentation, the FOD keeps that to himself). The FNG can't become a FOD without the FODs' permission, and this takes years of brown-nosing. This is similar to the situation that existed during the Middle Ages. In those days, there was no science of chemistry. There were a lot of trades that involved what we would now call chemical engineering, but in each trade the masters kept the formulas secret from the apprentices. They didn't actually understand the formula anyway, because they didn't know anything about chemistry --- they had just developed the formula by trial-and-error over the centuries. The whole purpose of this was to prevent up-and-coming FNGS from getting anywhere without the FODs' permission. The apprentices did a lot of brown-nosing, or else the FODs kicked them out and they became unskilled laborers. To a large extent, the breakthrough from the Middle Ages to the modern times, was not any particular scientific discovery --- the breakthrough was the introduction of science itself --- the guilds had to be defeated in order for the advance into modern times to be made. Getting back to the subject of Forth programming, the problem can be solved by making it possible for people to write libraries of reusable code. With libraries like this available (presumably with documentation), the FNG can write a program similar to previous programs --- he doesn't have to ask the FOD to give him the previous program, and he doesn't have to figure out how the previous program worked without any documentation. I think that the ANS-Forth committee purposely crippled ANS-Forth to prevent the writing of reusable code, and I think they did this for the purpose of turning Forth into a guild, similar to what existed in the trades of the Middle Ages. This had already been done in COBOL, and Elizabeth Rather came from a COBOL background. She was 43 in 1984, so she was already a FOD at that time (actually, a FOB). I think she plotted to make Forth similar to COBOL in that there would be no libraries of reusable code --- the difference would be that Forth would be for micro-controllers, whereas COBOL was for mainframes --- but there would be no difference in the social organization, which would be straight out of the Middle Ages. I have already described how this is common in machining, with most gcode programs being modifications of previous gcode programs. This is also done in locksmithing. The FOD has master-key systems in his back pocket that he can pull out and modify for the new job --- so the boss puts the FOD in charge of the master-key project, rather than let an FNG do it, as the FNG would have to generate a new master-key system from scratch, which takes time with pencil-and-paper. Of course, this is stupid! Randomness is the heart of security. They are supposed to be different every time. Also, with a mighty Vic-20 computer, it is possible to generate a new master-key system in less than 5 minutes --- and you are guaranteed that it will be high-quality, and not suffer from the typical lack of randomness that results from people thinking up random numbers in their head. This is an egregious example of FODs screwing everything up, but the same FOD-plot can be found in almost all trades. We are not as far removed from the Middle Ages as we presume that we are.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-28 06:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f4e26829-9e67-4276-9850-39a2efc73a37@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #31991 |
> I think that the ANS-Forth committee purposely crippled ANS-Forth to prevent the writing of reusable code, and I think they did this for the purpose of turning Forth into a guild, similar to what existed in the trades of the Middle Ages. This had already been done in COBOL, and Elizabeth Rather came from a COBOL background. She was 43 in 1984, so she was already a FOD at that time (actually, a FOB). Let's just say the B there stands for Broad... >_> > I think she plotted to make Forth similar to COBOL in that there would be no libraries of reusable code --- the difference would be that Forth would be for micro-controllers, whereas COBOL was for mainframes --- but there would be no difference in the social organization, which would be straight out of the Middle Ages. How do you know this? What if they just didn't know how to enable that, or never came up to the need for it? What if it wasn't even a conscious thing? Why don't we just ask them???? Elizabeth, please comment?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-28 08:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3bb9d867-6647-4028-8b0a-987f87483acd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #31999 |
On Saturday, June 28, 2014 8:59:49 AM UTC-5, Roger Levy wrote: > Elizabeth, please comment? A few months back, while waiting for a bus, I avoided overt rudeness towards a talkative bum to the point that the bum held a shouting, angry rant, directed at an imagined third party, so close to my face that I had to wipe off fleks of his spittle. I resolved then to not attend a bus stop without headphones and a loaded and ready "fuck off". It seems that you're still willing to smile and go along with crazy ranting hobos. Fine. That's your pleasure. But i cringe when you invite others to stand next you, in spittle range, to partake in the fascinating urban experience. -- Julian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roger Levy <roger.levy@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-28 08:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4bae6570-a9cb-4a47-bfe6-495fcd00fb41@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32002 |
> It seems that you're still willing to smile and go along with crazy ranting hobos. Fine. That's your pleasure. But i cringe when you invite others to stand next you, in spittle range, to partake in the fascinating urban experience. I do give most people a lot of credit, but trust me I'm being a lot less serious than it might seem ;) Hugh's alright. I can't explain myself, he's not the only crazy person I've made friends with, outside of CLF I seem to get along with nuts. They're fun. I admit that part of it is seeing how sane I can be in the face of insanity, and to develop a thicker skin and better sense for crazy. You might be surprised how much there is to sift through for an "outsider" (well, I used to feel like one, anyway). I don't really know up from down around here, so I entertain insane-sounding comments to allow sane people to set the record straight in a clear and open way. Also, if I manage to get someone to wake up, then, what's the harm? One less crazy to muddy up the signal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-28 07:23 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <Q7CdnXANzJmJZzPOnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #31999 |
On 6/28/14 3:59 AM, Roger Levy wrote: ... > How do you know this? What if they just didn't know how to enable that, or never came up to the need for it? What if it wasn't even a conscious thing? > > Why don't we just ask them???? > > Elizabeth, please comment? I have long since ceased to comment on Hugh's ravings. However, since *you* are asking politely, I will point out that I have consistently, for many years, deplored the fact that Forthers are much more concerned with writing new Forths than using them to write application-oriented libraries and publishing them. One of the principal purposes of making standards has been to facilitate code sharing. 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 | 2014-06-28 22:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4451114f-79b2-4ad4-af27-87a9e5e855ba@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32009 |
On Saturday, June 28, 2014 10:23:32 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > How do you know this? What if they just didn't know how to enable that, or never came up to the need for it? What if it wasn't even a conscious thing? I said that part of ANS-Forth's failure to support libraries of reusable code was ignorance on the part of the committee on how to do this. I think that it was purposeful ignorance though. They don't want to learn about lambda functions because they know (perhaps subconsciously, as you suggest), that this is FOD ruin. > I will point out that I have consistently, > for many years, deplored the fact that Forthers are much more concerned > with writing new Forths than using them to write application-oriented > libraries and publishing them. This is not true. You have never encouraged anybody to write application-oriented libraries and publish them. Also, Forth Inc. has never published any libraries of application-oriented code --- so you are not leading by example either. Any kind of reusable code is going to involve lambda functions (or contorted half-steps toward lambda functions, such as I have in my novice package). By opposing lambda functions, you have actively striven to prevent Forthers from writing application-oriented libraries and publishing them. > One of the principal purposes of making > standards has been to facilitate code sharing. This is not true either. The principle purpose of the ANS-Forth standard was to develop a herd of half-wits to apply for work at Forth Inc. and MPE. When I say "half-wit," I mean that they are smart enough to learn basic Forth programming (how the stack works), but not smart enough to understand that they will be perpetual FNGs, and that their future will primarily involve brown-nosing. This is because, as I explained, they can't write libraries of reusable application-oriented code. All programming involves cut-and-paste from existing programs, and the FODs control the archive of old programs. Modification of old programs is a terrible way to write new programs. The FODs control the archive of the old programs, so the FNGs have to brown-nose to gain access. After they get access, they still are slow at writing the new programs because the old programs aren't documented (or, at least, the FODs aren't making the documentation available), and so they are perpetually in a purgatory of struggling to figure out these old (typically low-quality) programs --- it is like alchemy, except that instead of being expected to turn lead into gold, they are expected to turn crap into gold. This backwards-looking approach is why so little progress was made during the Middle Ages (and why everybody fled to America during the 1600s and 1700s) --- and this is why nobody is volunteering to be an FNG in ANS-Forth (Forth has been dead since 1994 in regard to popularity) --- all that we have left are frustrated FODs with no FNGs to bully.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-27 02:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <89637270-d912-47ae-bfd8-b0b6dc791b8f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32009 |
On Saturday, June 28, 2014 6:23:32 PM UTC+1, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 6/28/14 3:59 AM, Roger Levy wrote: > > ... > > > How do you know this? What if they just didn't know how to enable that, or never came up to the need for it? What if it wasn't even a conscious thing? > > > > > > Why don't we just ask them???? > > > > > > Elizabeth, please comment? > > > > I have long since ceased to comment on Hugh's ravings. However, since > > *you* are asking politely, I will point out that I have consistently, > > for many years, deplored the fact that Forthers are much more concerned > > with writing new Forths than using them to write application-oriented > > libraries and publishing them. One of the principal purposes of making > > standards has been to facilitate code sharing. > > > > 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." > > ================================================== Elizabeth, exactly how I see it; there are 100 wheels probably that have been reinvented as it is seemingly fun and easy, and they are all different sizes, so do not fit elsewhere - so the amount of cars produced using them is limited as well, there is only 100% of time - so you can either do wheels or cars. The Forth approach somehow shows how you can limit traffic on the road - just do wheels. A standard is like a communication vehicle. You can do your own for your project - the result is in the extreme very limited communication, you can talk to yourself only?? Actually one question this produces: how many people write their own C compilers? And if so, does anybody else trust them and use them?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-28 07:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9e84048b-df9a-423f-a69b-bd36abdb53f0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32709 |
> > Elizabeth, exactly how I see it; there are 100 wheels probably that have been reinvented as it is seemingly fun and easy, and they are all different sizes, so do not fit elsewhere - so the amount of cars produced using them is limited as well, there is only 100% of time - so you can either do wheels or cars. The Forth approach somehow shows how you can limit traffic on the road - just do wheels. > > A standard is like a communication vehicle. You can do your own for your project - the result is in the extreme very limited communication, you can talk to yourself only?? > > Actually one question this produces: how many people write their own C compilers? And if so, does anybody else trust them and use them? While this is completely true, it doesn't explain why this is like this. Maybe because a forth system is too easy to make. Of course, it will be very limited, and the maker will not go too far with it. Soon he will find that it's too hard to do some more serious work with it, or will just don't know how to do it, and will quit. People don't want to invest money in something obscure. And forth is an obscure thing when first encountered. It is not learned in school. You only happen to hear about it, or find it over internet. People want to try something for free. Maybe they will like it, maybe not. But don't expect people to buy it just like that. When I was first exposed to forth, all I found on the internet was eforth and camelforth (for embedded). I played for a while with these systems, but they were HARDLY what I would like. Next I found quite a nice piece of work, the Brad Eckert's Tinyboot. It was a real cross-compiler, even had an interesting one-wire debug link to the target, emulated on a plain port pin (this was for an avr). The tiny boot is dead and for me was too complex so I dropped it too. Brad switched to Fminus, but Fminus seems to be dead also since 2007. There is now a try from MPE, they made a lite version of their compiler. I downloaded the lite version but when I saw their IDE, I was very disapointed. No syntax highlighting at all? I have better development experience with my cross-compiler with free tools like komodo edit for example, komodo syntax highlighting for forth is particularly very good. Two shortcut key for compiling, downloading to target, and a teraterm window for target interpreter. That's it. If they (MPE) or Forth inc. cannot make a good IDE (out of current technologies like Scintilla for example) maybe they better make a command line toolkit and a tutorial how to set up a good environment with something ready available like komodo edit or the like. Maybe they will have better chances to attract people.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-28 11:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b55b306a-52a5-4b2d-b214-b3182393854a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32739 |
On Monday, July 28, 2014 3:31:44 PM UTC+1, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > > > > > Elizabeth, exactly how I see it; there are 100 wheels probably that have been reinvented as it is seemingly fun and easy, and they are all different sizes, so do not fit elsewhere - so the amount of cars produced using them is limited as well, there is only 100% of time - so you can either do wheels or cars. The Forth approach somehow shows how you can limit traffic on the road - just do wheels. > > > > > > A standard is like a communication vehicle. You can do your own for your project - the result is in the extreme very limited communication, you can talk to yourself only?? > > > > > > Actually one question this produces: how many people write their own C compilers? And if so, does anybody else trust them and use them? > > > > While this is completely true, it doesn't explain why this is like this. In a way it does. One c Compiler ( about ) and a 1000 programmers. How effective will they be in programming. One set of rules and you go. 1000 Forths (a bit exaggerated) and the time is gone, no time for a GUI. So if you program in Forth you do not expect one as noe of the offers has it. Maybe because a forth system is too easy to make. Of course, it will be very limited, and the maker will not go too far with it. Soon he will find that it's too hard to do some more serious work with it, or will just don't know how to do it, and will quit. This is where many will disagree, including me as you know what the model is you can come close - I assume. Many of the Forths have been done as Freeware. > > People don't want to invest money in something obscure. And forth is an obscure thing when first encountered. It is not learned in school. You only happen to hear about it, or find it over internet. Disagree again. When VHDL was introduced it was extremely obscure - hardware written in software?? How can this work - well it does. > > People want to try something for free. Maybe they will like it, maybe not. But don't expect people to buy it just like that. We all live in a commercial world - I assume you want a salary as well or are retired?? > > When I was first exposed to forth, all I found on the internet was eforth and camelforth (for embedded). I played for a while with these systems, but they were HARDLY what I would like. This is where I agree - the offers are not clear on how to get from toys to professional tools. MPE started with offering a free LITE Compiler - ARM and for low cost hardware MSP430. And made it into some of the major magazines. Next I found quite a nice piece of work, the Brad Eckert's Tinyboot. It was a real cross-compiler, even had an interesting one-wire debug link to the target, emulated on a plain port pin (this was for an avr). The tiny boot is dead and for me was too complex so I dropped it too. This is why I would prefer you use commercial tools, about 100 dollars and you can start with MPE - if you cannot afford this for your project - there is a free version - and I assume you agree this will be more limited and no source code yet... Well there is now an MPE based Forth Tutorial that you might have seen, ANS compatible and as well with Forth INC and with GForth - run it even on a tablet. > > Brad switched to Fminus, but Fminus seems to be dead also since 2007. > There is now a try from MPE, they made a lite version of their compiler. I downloaded the lite version but when I saw their IDE, I was very disapointed. The IDE I assume is exactly like the Forth people like it - well this is why it is as is for the Forth customers. Can you please confirm that the FORTH INC IDE is more C Like? No syntax highlighting at all? Wrong in two areas. Ultraedit does highlighting for the more professional ones ( free for the first 30 days ) , and as you might know there is Jedit (FREE) with Highlighting (FREE). I have better development experience with my cross-compiler with free tools like komodo edit for example, komodo syntax highlighting for forth is particularly very good. Two shortcut key for compiling, downloading to target, and a teraterm window for target interpreter. That's it. > > If they (MPE) or Forth inc. cannot make a good IDE (out of current technologies like Scintilla for example) maybe they better make a command line toolkit and a tutorial how to set up a good environment with something ready available like komodo edit or the like. Maybe they will have better chances to attract people. Good input to be discussed internally at MPE.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-28 19:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <CpGdnaEARN9QP0vOnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #32749 |
On 7/28/14 6:23 PM, JUERGEN wrote: ... > Can you please confirm that the FORTH INC IDE is more C Like? No, because I don't use C (nor does anyone at FORTH, Inc.) so we don't know what a C IDE is like. > No syntax highlighting at all? FORTH, Inc. supports several programmers editors. If you set it up for the editor of your choice it will do highlighting to the extent it's supported in your preferred editor. > Wrong in two areas. Ultraedit does highlighting for the more professional ones ( free for the first 30 days ) , > and as you might know there is Jedit (FREE) with Highlighting (FREE). > > I have better development experience with my cross-compiler with free tools like komodo edit for example, komodo syntax highlighting for forth is particularly very good. Two shortcut key for compiling, downloading to target, and a teraterm window for target interpreter. That's it. >> >> If they (MPE) or Forth inc. cannot make a good IDE (out of current technologies like Scintilla for example) maybe they better make a command line toolkit and a tutorial how to set up a good environment with something ready available like komodo edit or the like. > Maybe they will have better chances to attract people. SwiftForth and SwiftX for Windows use normal Windows conventions for its IDE. The Linux/OSX versions are more command-line oriented. > Good input to be discussed internally at MPE. > Try the FORTH, Inc. evaluation versions and let us know what you think. 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 | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-28 20:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ee9e7a84-fa0d-42c7-a5bc-d4b501731732@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32749 |
> > Maybe because a forth system is too easy to make. Of course, it will be very limited, and the maker will not go too far with it. Soon he will find that it's too hard to do some more serious work with it, or will just don't know how to do it, and will quit. > > > > This is where many will disagree, including me as you know what the model is you can come close - I assume. Many of the Forths have been done as Freeware. > If the Forth had a raised standard from the start, many would know from the start that this is not that simple. It's the C case. You know that you don't have much chances to make a C compiler. But forth advocates the minimalism. Well, the minimalism is nice in theory, but the practice kill us. This is some kind of proverb :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 11:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8cde8d63-e90d-4bc3-8041-b2e78a36bbf7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32762 |
On Monday, July 28, 2014 11:59:00 PM UTC-4, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > ... forth advocates the minimalism. That's what we did, too, when we developed the 4E4th-IDE. The 4E4th-IDE is a complete development system for minimalists for the MSP430 G2 LaunchPad. You can even flash MPE's MSP430 Forth Lite with it and develop your Forth application for the MSP430G2553. > Well, the minimalism is nice in theory, but the practice kill us. This is some kind of proverb :) I am working with this minimalism since 1984, and it didn't kill me. On the contrary, it helped me to make a living for 30 years.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 09:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <53d76754.1753427010@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #32739 |
On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 07:31:44 -0700 (PDT), Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> wrote: >There is now a try from MPE, they made a lite version of their compiler. I = >downloaded the lite version but when I saw their IDE, I was very disapointe= >d. No syntax highlighting at all? AIDE is the IDE under discussion. The ForthEd2 editor supplied with AIDE is *documented* as a simple editor. Like all serious programmers, I have my favourite programmers' editor (UltraEdit). Editors are so cheap (even the the commercial ones), that it is pointless for a toolmaker to write an editor from scratch. That's why AIDE allows you to integrate with a large number of external editors. There is *no* virtue in forcing people to use a specific editor. We provide an editor with AIDE because people expect it. We have clients who use AIDE and ForthEd2 because ForthEd2 is better than what comes with Windows. If you want to improve ForthEd2, the source code for ForthEd2 is provided as the example MDI application with all versions of VFX Forth for Windows. I look forward to your contributions. Does TeraTerm allow you to have eight additional display windows which are ideal for debugging multi-tasking applications? And does it provide the code for handling them? I thought not. PowerTerm does. PowerTerm has automatic triggers to support reflash of an embedded system. I don't think that TeraTerm does. AIDE is the way it is because it has evolved over many years of embedded system development. In the Forth tradition it is small, simple and fast. It contains the tools you need. The guts of the MPE Lite version is the cross compiler, which is a command line tool that you can use independently of AIDE. You won't find better Forth code generation for ARM and Cortex anywhere else. And the compiler integrates with a Segger J-Link for those who use them. 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 | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 07:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d4c780fd-0e1f-4b0e-87b5-430e50068a51@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32766 |
> >There is now a try from MPE, they made a lite version of their compiler. I = > > >downloaded the lite version but when I saw their IDE, I was very disapointe= > > >d. No syntax highlighting at all? > > > > AIDE is the IDE under discussion. > > > > The ForthEd2 editor supplied with AIDE is *documented* as a simple > > editor. Like all serious programmers, I have my favourite programmers' > > editor (UltraEdit). Editors are so cheap (even the the commercial > > ones), that it is pointless for a toolmaker to write an editor > > from scratch. That's why AIDE allows you to integrate with a large > > number of external editors. There is *no* virtue in forcing people > > to use a specific editor. > > I really wanted to see the integration of an external editor with Aide (second time). This time with Programmer's notepad. I setup the path in the Aide, and the Locate command like in the Aide manual. And, what next? I wanted to edit a forth file. From Aide, you still have only a chance: to open Ed2, and open some file in it. If I go directly to my file, I can open it in the PNotepad, but that's it. What's the integration? After many tries, I was able to open the forth file in PNotepad but from the compiler window directly, not from Aide. And to do that I had to enter the PNotepad path again, in the compiler dialog. The compiler didn't know about Aide settings. And even after that, the only thing I achieved was to open the file. I can do that with my hands to the same effect. I also searched the net for some tutorial for MPE tools. A tutorial for a real beginner with no experience in MPE tools. Didn't find anything. A tutorial on how to use the tools, step by step, with printscreens, etc. Not the 1 2 + . .s words etc. kind of tutorials. I'm tired about these tutorials. One more thing: your compiler manual states that there are some commands like that: EDITOR-IS <file> EDIT <file> etc. I really read some of the manual to find about the editing integration. I tried the commands but they don't seem to exist. Maybe they were not in the search order, but it was too much to dig. According to the manual, things looks like simple. And by the way, the first time I installed the system, it didn't work at all. It couldn't find anything, not even the pdf files. I was wrong because I installed it in another locations. The second time I installed in the location that it wanted, and from there it worked. That is my experience with MPE tools. It's not the worst, but it's hardly a good one. And I am in no way a beginner, not even in forth programming. A beginner will be lost instantly I suppose. And, I'm sorry to say that, but your attitude is quite arrogant, and helpless. I just explained what is my experience and expectations. > > We provide an editor with AIDE because people expect it. We have > > clients who use AIDE and ForthEd2 because ForthEd2 is better than > > what comes with Windows. > > > > If you want to improve ForthEd2, the source code for ForthEd2 > > is provided as the example MDI application with all versions of > > VFX Forth for Windows. I look forward to your contributions. > > > > Does TeraTerm allow you to have eight additional display windows > > which are ideal for debugging multi-tasking applications? And does > > it provide the code for handling them? I thought not. PowerTerm does. > > > > PowerTerm has automatic triggers to support reflash of an embedded > > system. I don't think that TeraTerm does. > > > > AIDE is the way it is because it has evolved over many years of > > embedded system development. In the Forth tradition it is small, > > simple and fast. It contains the tools you need. > > > > The guts of the MPE Lite version is the cross compiler, which is a > > command line tool that you can use independently of AIDE. You won't > > find better Forth code generation for ARM and Cortex anywhere else. > > And the compiler integrates with a Segger J-Link for those who use > > them. > > > > 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 | stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 17:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <53d7dc20.1783327098@news.demon.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #32768 |
On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 07:44:04 -0700 (PDT), Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> wrote: >I wanted to edit a forth file. From Aide, you still have only a chance: to = >open Ed2, and open some file in it. If I go directly to my file, I can open= > it in the PNotepad, but that's it. What's the integration? just type LOCATE DUP and the source code for DUP appears. LOCATE is where we live when debugging a target. The cross-compiler stays alive after completion so that you can use tools like LOCATE. >After many tries, I was able to open the forth file in PNotepad but from th= >e compiler window directly, not from Aide. And to do that I had to enter th= >e PNotepad path again, in the compiler dialog. The compiler didn't know abo= >ut Aide settings. And even after that, the only thing I achieved was to ope= >n the file. I can do that with my hands to the same effect. Did you send an email asking a question? >One more thing: your compiler manual states that there are some commands li= >ke that: EDITOR-IS <file> EDIT <file> etc. I really read some of the manua= >l to find about the editing integration. I tried the commands but they don'= >t seem to exist. Maybe they were not in the search order, but it was too mu= >ch to dig. According to the manual, things looks like simple. The default installation with AIDE is set up to run the editor through AIDE. If you do not like AIDE, run the compiler directly and the command line stuff works fine. >And by the way, the first time I installed the system, it didn't work at al= >l. It couldn't find anything, not even the pdf files. I was wrong because I= > installed it in another locations. >The second time I installed in the location that it wanted, and from there = >it worked. Please send more details off-line. >That is my experience with MPE tools. It's not the worst, but it's hardly a= > good one. And I am in no way a beginner, not even in forth programming. A = >beginner will be lost instantly I suppose. Actually, please used to another Forth are our most difficult clients. A major problem is that they assume that all Forth systems are the same. They really are not. >And, I'm sorry to say that, but your attitude is quite arrogant, and helple= >ss. I just explained what is my experience and expectations. Sorry to have disappointed you. We really do try, but we do not expect to do tech support on c.l.f. 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 | JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 11:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1e5e430e-5f85-4620-a436-80159cfe7ee0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32768 |
On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 3:44:04 PM UTC+1, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > > >There is now a try from MPE, they made a lite version of their compiler. I = > > > > > > >downloaded the lite version but when I saw their IDE, I was very disapointe= > > > > > > >d. No syntax highlighting at all? > > > > > > > > > > > > AIDE is the IDE under discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > The ForthEd2 editor supplied with AIDE is *documented* as a simple > > > > > > editor. Like all serious programmers, I have my favourite programmers' > > > > > > editor (UltraEdit). Editors are so cheap (even the the commercial > > > > > > ones), that it is pointless for a toolmaker to write an editor > > > > > > from scratch. That's why AIDE allows you to integrate with a large > > > > > > number of external editors. There is *no* virtue in forcing people > > > > > > to use a specific editor. > > > > > > > > I really wanted to see the integration of an external editor with Aide (second time). This time with Programmer's notepad. I setup the path in the Aide, and the Locate command like in the Aide manual. > > And, what next? > > I wanted to edit a forth file. From Aide, you still have only a chance: to open Ed2, and open some file in it. If I go directly to my file, I can open it in the PNotepad, but that's it. What's the integration? > > After many tries, I was able to open the forth file in PNotepad but from the compiler window directly, not from Aide. And to do that I had to enter the PNotepad path again, in the compiler dialog. The compiler didn't know about Aide settings. And even after that, the only thing I achieved was to open the file. I can do that with my hands to the same effect. > > > > I also searched the net for some tutorial for MPE tools. A tutorial for a real beginner with no experience in MPE tools. Didn't find anything. A tutorial on how to use the tools, step by step, with printscreens, etc. Not the 1 2 + . .s words etc. kind of tutorials. I'm tired about these tutorials. > > > > One more thing: your compiler manual states that there are some commands like that: EDITOR-IS <file> EDIT <file> etc. I really read some of the manual to find about the editing integration. I tried the commands but they don't seem to exist. Maybe they were not in the search order, but it was too much to dig. According to the manual, things looks like simple. > > > > And by the way, the first time I installed the system, it didn't work at all. It couldn't find anything, not even the pdf files. I was wrong because I installed it in another locations. > > The second time I installed in the location that it wanted, and from there it worked. > > > > That is my experience with MPE tools. It's not the worst, but it's hardly a good one. And I am in no way a beginner, not even in forth programming. A beginner will be lost instantly I suppose. > > > > And, I'm sorry to say that, but your attitude is quite arrogant, and helpless. I just explained what is my experience and expectations. > > > > > > > > > > We provide an editor with AIDE because people expect it. We have > > > > > > clients who use AIDE and ForthEd2 because ForthEd2 is better than > > > > > > what comes with Windows. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want to improve ForthEd2, the source code for ForthEd2 > > > > > > is provided as the example MDI application with all versions of > > > > > > VFX Forth for Windows. I look forward to your contributions. > > > > > > > > > > > > Does TeraTerm allow you to have eight additional display windows > > > > > > which are ideal for debugging multi-tasking applications? And does > > > > > > it provide the code for handling them? I thought not. PowerTerm does. > > > > > > > > > > > > PowerTerm has automatic triggers to support reflash of an embedded > > > > > > system. I don't think that TeraTerm does. > > > > > > > > > > > > AIDE is the way it is because it has evolved over many years of > > > > > > embedded system development. In the Forth tradition it is small, > > > > > > simple and fast. It contains the tools you need. > > > > > > > > > > > > The guts of the MPE Lite version is the cross compiler, which is a > > > > > > command line tool that you can use independently of AIDE. You won't > > > > > > find better Forth code generation for ARM and Cortex anywhere else. > > > > > > And the compiler integrates with a Segger J-Link for those who use > > > > > > them. > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 Radomir, what are you trying to achieve? If you have a problem, write an email to MPE. Help is there quickly. If you expect that the free versions are better than the commercial ones - well there is a problem - but nothing to do with MPE. MPE will help where possible, but it seems that is not what you want - actually you have not made clear what you want. You do not like what MPE offers - fine, the only option in the commercial Forth world is then to use the commercial FORTH INC tools. It seems you did not have the same go at Forth INC as with MPE, is there any obvious reason - as I assume they have a comparable as IDE. So you either accept what is there or you walk away and go back to whatever you use. Regarding Editor I just added Jedit and it does highlighting - as does the Ultraedit with MPE Forth - and you are free to add your own to MPE Forth. If it did not work you might not have read the manual properly - or might have sent an email to MPE already? If neither Ultraedit for the professionals, nor Jedit for the free solution, nor your own one is good enough - well there is actually not much left. The editor is a tool to write programs - the beauty is in Forth the language not in your choice of editor. BUT IF YOU CAN SUGGEST A BETTER TOOL CHAIN - I ASSUME ALL OF US WILL BE INTERESTED TO LOOK AT IT TO IMPROVE THE FORTH ENVIRONMENT - and in Forth many things are possible quickly - you might be positively surprised.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mhx@iae.nl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 12:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7b3cc5c2-f599-4d51-98cd-6f1c36ccb23d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32771 |
On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 8:14:26 PM UTC+2, JUERGEN wrote: [..] > BUT IF YOU CAN SUGGEST A BETTER TOOL CHAIN - I ASSUME ALL > OF US WILL BE INTERESTED TO LOOK AT IT TO IMPROVE THE > FORTH ENVIRONMENT - and in Forth many things are possible > quickly - you might be positively surprised. The Scintilla-based tool in the current Win32Forth distribution is pretty good. I would like to have that for my Forths, but there are many projects and there is so little time ... -marcel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 18:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <51ce0541-fd1b-4fe2-8862-3a35fe82be6a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32768 |
On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 7:44:04 AM UTC-7, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > > >There is now a try from MPE, they made a lite version of their compiler. I = > > >downloaded the lite version but when I saw their IDE, I was very disapointe= > > >d. No syntax highlighting at all? No syntax coloring --- the horror! --- the horror! ;-) You seem overly concerned with having a snazzy IDE. Most likely you are expecting this because you are accustomed to it in non-Forth languages. I don't concern myself with IDE issues at all. When I was at Testra, I wrote a lot of MFX using the UR/Forth screen editor, until I was told to stop that and use sequential files as per company policy --- but I never bothered to integrate the editor (they used Multi-Edit because the Multi-Edit guy was a former employee of Testra) into the Forth system at all, because I didn't care. I don't know whether they did anything more than I did, as I didn't ask. Syntax coloring doesn't even make sense in Forth. It is legal in Forth (unlike C, etc.) to define a word: +WHILE --- but editors that do syntax coloring will see the + and WHILE as built-in symbols, both of which are different colors than user-defined symbols. With my own language, I may provide only a screen editor (possibly based on the UR/Forth screen editor) --- I haven't decided yet --- this isn't an issue anytime soon. P.S. Are you translating your posts from a foreign language?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 20:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4acb2b93-7397-42dd-8a3e-c2a80c623cda@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32773 |
miercuri, 30 iulie 2014, 04:36:30 UTC+3, hughag...@yahoo.com a scris: > On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 7:44:04 AM UTC-7, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > > > > >There is now a try from MPE, they made a lite version of their compiler. I = > > > > >downloaded the lite version but when I saw their IDE, I was very disapointe= > > > > >d. No syntax highlighting at all? > > > > No syntax coloring --- the horror! --- the horror! ;-) > > > > You seem overly concerned with having a snazzy IDE. Most likely you are expecting this because you are accustomed to it in non-Forth languages. I don't concern myself with IDE issues at all. When I was at Testra, I wrote a lot of MFX using the UR/Forth screen editor, until I was told to stop that and use sequential files as per company policy --- but I never bothered to integrate the editor (they used Multi-Edit because the Multi-Edit guy was a former employee of Testra) into the Forth system at all, because I didn't care. I don't know whether they did anything more than I did, as I didn't ask. > > > > Syntax coloring doesn't even make sense in Forth. It is legal in Forth (unlike C, etc.) to define a word: +WHILE --- but editors that do syntax coloring will see the + and WHILE as built-in symbols, both of which are different colors than user-defined symbols. > > > > With my own language, I may provide only a screen editor (possibly based on the UR/Forth screen editor) --- I haven't decided yet --- this isn't an issue anytime soon. > > > > P.S. Are you translating your posts from a foreign language? Yup, english is a foreign language to me :) People, you don't like colors, fine. I like them very much. My minimal "standard" in a forth syntax coloring is this: - new defined words: red (a la Chuck Moore). This requires advanced parsers, but a few editors are able to do it - a few control words that change flow: blue (if, else, begin while etc.). This is simple, just keywords. - comments: green or gray. This is very important to me. I have a lot of comments! - numbers and strings: some other color. The least important. That's it. I'm a visual guy. I want to see my programs in colors!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@yahoo.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-29 21:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5db2fd3a-196c-421e-b286-42cf1575ecb4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32774 |
On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 8:38:26 PM UTC-7, Raimond Dragomir wrote: > > P.S. Are you translating your posts from a foreign language? > > Yup, english is a foreign language to me :) What language, and what country, are you of? > People, you don't like colors, fine. I like them very much. My minimal "standard" in a forth syntax coloring is this: > > - new defined words: red (a la Chuck Moore). This requires advanced parsers, but a few editors are able to do it > > - a few control words that change flow: blue (if, else, begin while etc.). This is simple, just keywords. > > - comments: green or gray. This is very important to me. I have a lot of comments! > > - numbers and strings: some other color. The least important. > > That's it. I'm a visual guy. I want to see my programs in colors! The only thing in that list that I might attempt is comments. What if the programmer defines a word 123 --- is that a new word, or a number? All this stuff seems super-complicated to me --- if you can implement it though, then I will put it in my language! :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web