Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #36333 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-02-06 09:51 -0800 |
| Last post | 2015-02-12 20:03 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 78 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-06 09:51 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-06 11:10 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-07 00:01 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-08 17:43 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-09 07:48 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-09 08:21 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-09 20:07 +0000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-02-09 22:01 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-10 00:48 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-09 22:39 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-10 08:27 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-10 23:30 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-02-11 01:04 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-13 22:27 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-14 12:58 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-14 21:02 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-14 22:12 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-15 16:12 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-15 19:26 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-16 17:46 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-17 19:17 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Tessa Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 07:00 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 11:42 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Hannu Vuolasaho <vuokkosetae@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 19:27 +0200
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-18 17:54 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-18 18:32 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-18 18:58 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-18 20:10 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2015-02-19 11:18 +0000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-19 05:29 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Tessa Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> - 2015-02-19 06:24 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-19 19:40 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Tessa Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> - 2015-02-20 03:42 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-02-20 20:45 +0100
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-20 13:45 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-20 14:02 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-20 20:12 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-20 18:28 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-02-20 17:49 -1000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-21 08:09 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-02-21 09:12 -1000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-21 14:33 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-02-21 21:39 -1000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-22 09:13 +0000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-21 12:07 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-20 19:18 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2015-02-21 14:22 +0100
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2015-02-21 14:24 +0100
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2015-02-21 14:25 +0100
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-21 07:42 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-21 12:55 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-23 20:45 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-24 03:00 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) - 2015-02-24 06:42 +0100
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-24 03:01 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-23 16:59 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-24 03:00 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-20 14:06 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-20 20:13 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-02-19 12:06 -1000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-19 19:38 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-02-19 16:47 -1000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-20 00:54 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-19 22:29 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-20 04:21 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-20 01:27 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-02-20 01:39 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-19 10:43 +0000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 11:39 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-02-16 01:24 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-16 19:17 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-02-17 01:14 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-18 17:36 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-19 11:47 +0000
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 11:47 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-18 20:29 -0500
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-02-19 00:55 -0800
Re: The Technocrats Control Our Food Supply "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> - 2015-02-12 20:03 -0500
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 09:12 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <Jv2dnUOv9PURRXXJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #36747 |
On 2/21/15 6:09 AM, visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote: > On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 10:49:59 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 2/20/15 4:28 PM, visualforth.com wrote: >>> On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 8:12:02 PM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote: >>> >>>> E.g., 'rickman' who won't stop discussing microprocessors >>>> in a Forth programming group. >>> >>> I am wondering, because I am relatively new to c.l.f., I wasn't here in those glorious usenet times. >>> >>> Am I making a mistake when thinking that c.l.f is about programming in Forth, especially programming microprocessors using Forth, because Forth is the best programming language for microprocessors which normally have restricted memory space? >>> >>> And if so, is there a fork to Forth for microprocessors? >>> >>> I tried to find rules about content on c.l.f., but to now avail. Are there any? >>> >> >> This is pretty much the place for Forth for Microprocessors. There are a >> number of cross-compilers. Someone up-thread mentioned FORTH, Inc. and >> MPE. FORTH, Inc. supports interactive cross-compilers for most of the >> common microcontrollers, hosted on Windows, Linux, and OSX, with >> extensive documentation and support. Free evaluation versions are >> available. For more information, see www.forth.com. We have been >> supporting professional Forth programmers since the 1970's. >> >> 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, > Thanks for reassuring! > I looked at http://www.forth.com and found a free "SwiftX MSP430 for the TI MSP430". My idea is to test it with TI's G2 LaunchPad, so I downloaded Forth Inc.'s SwiftX MSP430 for the TI MSP430. > > I opened the swiftx-msp430.pdf and there it says: > > 1.3 Run Demo > A demo application is included with most SwiftX systems. Follow the instructions in the SwiftX Reference Manual, Section 1.5.3. > > But there is no "SwiftX Reference Manual". I googled for "SwiftX Reference Manual", but only references to a "SwiftX Reference Manual" came up, no download. > > How shall I proceed? > > Something is missing there. It should be part of your download, in a folder labeled Doc, along with the Forth Programmer's Handbook, the ANS Forth Standard, and an MSP430-specific SwiftX manual. Running the demo application on a board requires the configuration to match the board you have. SwiftX supports several of the most popular boards for each microcontroller; if you have a different one, the MSP430 manual should have information to help you configure it for your board. If you need help, you may contact support@forth.com. 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 | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 14:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9a198cb4-44a9-4eff-a9d5-918976f58f6e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36752 |
On Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 2:12:14 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 2/21/15 6:09 AM, visualforth.com wrote: > > On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 10:49:59 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> On 2/20/15 4:28 PM, visualforth.com wrote: > >>> On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 8:12:02 PM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote: > >>> > >>>> E.g., 'rickman' who won't stop discussing microprocessors > >>>> in a Forth programming group. > >>> > >>> I am wondering, because I am relatively new to c.l.f., I wasn't here in those glorious usenet times. > >>> > >>> Am I making a mistake when thinking that c.l.f is about programming in Forth, especially programming microprocessors using Forth, because Forth is the best programming language for microprocessors which normally have restricted memory space? > >>> > >>> And if so, is there a fork to Forth for microprocessors? > >>> > >>> I tried to find rules about content on c.l.f., but to now avail. Are there any? > >>> > >> > >> This is pretty much the place for Forth for Microprocessors. There are a > >> number of cross-compilers. Someone up-thread mentioned FORTH, Inc. and > >> MPE. FORTH, Inc. supports interactive cross-compilers for most of the > >> common microcontrollers, hosted on Windows, Linux, and OSX, with > >> extensive documentation and support. Free evaluation versions are > >> available. For more information, see www.forth.com. We have been > >> supporting professional Forth programmers since the 1970's. > >> > >> 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, > > Thanks for reassuring! > > I looked at http://www.forth.com and found a free "SwiftX MSP430 for the TI MSP430". My idea is to test it with TI's G2 LaunchPad, so I downloaded Forth Inc.'s SwiftX MSP430 for the TI MSP430. > > > > I opened the swiftx-msp430.pdf and there it says: > > > > 1.3 Run Demo > > A demo application is included with most SwiftX systems. Follow the instructions in the SwiftX Reference Manual, Section 1.5.3. > > > > But there is no "SwiftX Reference Manual". I googled for "SwiftX Reference Manual", but only references to a "SwiftX Reference Manual" came up, no download. > > > > How shall I proceed? > > > > Something is missing there. > > It should be part of your download, in a folder labeled Doc, along with > the Forth Programmer's Handbook, the ANS Forth Standard, and an > MSP430-specific SwiftX manual. > > Running the demo application on a board requires the configuration to > match the board you have. SwiftX supports several of the most popular > boards for each microcontroller; if you have a different one, the MSP430 > manual should have information to help you configure it for your board. > If you need help, you may contact support@forth.com. > > 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." > ================================================== The folder named Doc contains 8 files: swiftx.pdf swiftx-msp430.pdf handbook.pdf readme-eval.pdf license-eval.pdf dpans94.pdf embedding.gif homelogo.gif Seems to be that the "SwiftX Reference Manual" is hidden somewhere. I opened all files and I discovered that swiftx.pdf seems to be the "SwiftX Reference Manual". May be it is for educational purposes that there is no hint. So I found the reference for starting, showing more educational stuff: 1.5.3 Running the Demo Application ...To run this program, launch SwiftX as described in Section 1.5.1 1.5.1 Starting a Development Session Launch SwiftX as described in Section 1.4.2. 1.4.2 Launching SwiftX ... See Section 1.2 for a discussion of the SwiftX source directory organization. 1.2 Directory Structure The directory structure for the files provided with SwiftX is shown in Figure 1... See Section 1.4.2. I don't know if I ever will be able to start a first SwiftX demo on my G2 LaunchPad. The "SWIFTX MSP430 Target Reference Manual" doesn't mention a LaunchPad nor it's micro, the MSP430G2553, anyway. The only MSP430 mentioned there is the MSP430F149. Is there a description somewhere how to get SwiftX running on TI's MSP430G2553 LaunchPad or any other of TI's LaunchPads? May be on a FRAM LaunchPad? If SwiftX is available for TI's MSP-EXP430FR5969 it would be worth for me to buy SwiftX.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 21:39 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <GqqdnQMY48wBGnTJnZ2dnUU7-budnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #36755 |
On 2/21/15 12:33 PM, visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 2:12:14 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >> On 2/21/15 6:09 AM, visualforth.com wrote: >>> On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 10:49:59 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: ... >>> >>> Elizabeth, >>> Thanks for reassuring! >>> I looked at http://www.forth.com and found a free "SwiftX MSP430 for the TI MSP430". My idea is to test it with TI's G2 LaunchPad, so I downloaded Forth Inc.'s SwiftX MSP430 for the TI MSP430. >>> >>> I opened the swiftx-msp430.pdf and there it says: >>> >>> 1.3 Run Demo >>> A demo application is included with most SwiftX systems. Follow the instructions in the SwiftX Reference Manual, Section 1.5.3. >>> >>> But there is no "SwiftX Reference Manual". I googled for "SwiftX Reference Manual", but only references to a "SwiftX Reference Manual" came up, no download. >>> >>> How shall I proceed? >>> >>> Something is missing there. >> >> It should be part of your download, in a folder labeled Doc, along with >> the Forth Programmer's Handbook, the ANS Forth Standard, and an >> MSP430-specific SwiftX manual. >> >> Running the demo application on a board requires the configuration to >> match the board you have. SwiftX supports several of the most popular >> boards for each microcontroller; if you have a different one, the MSP430 >> manual should have information to help you configure it for your board. >> If you need help, you may contact support@forth.com. >> >> Cheers, >> Elizabeth > > The folder named Doc contains 8 files: > swiftx.pdf ^ This is the SwiftX Reference Manual > swiftx-msp430.pdf ^ This is the MSP-430 Supplement to the SwiftX Reference Manual describing configuration issues, the assembler, and processor-specific features. > handbook.pdf ^ This is the Forth Programmer's Handbook (general reference manual on Forth) > readme-eval.pdf ^ Getting started > license-eval.pdf ^ Legal T&C for the evaluation version > dpans94.pdf ^ ANS Forth Standard (Forth94) > embedding.gif > homelogo.gif ^ The last two are graphics. > > Seems to be that the "SwiftX Reference Manual" is hidden somewhere. I opened all files and I discovered that swiftx.pdf seems to be the "SwiftX Reference Manual". > > May be it is for educational purposes that there is no hint. > > So I found the reference for starting, showing more educational stuff: > > 1.5.3 Running the Demo Application > ...To run this program, launch SwiftX as described in Section 1.5.1 > > 1.5.1 Starting a Development Session > Launch SwiftX as described in Section 1.4.2. > > 1.4.2 Launching SwiftX > ... See Section 1.2 for a discussion of the SwiftX source directory organization. > > 1.2 Directory Structure > The directory structure for the files provided with SwiftX is shown in Figure 1... See Section 1.4.2. > > I don't know if I ever will be able to start a first SwiftX demo on my G2 LaunchPad. > > The "SWIFTX MSP430 Target Reference Manual" doesn't mention a LaunchPad nor it's micro, the MSP430G2553, anyway. The only MSP430 mentioned there is the MSP430F149. > > Is there a description somewhere how to get SwiftX running on TI's MSP430G2553 LaunchPad or any other of TI's LaunchPads? May be on a FRAM LaunchPad? > If SwiftX is available for TI's MSP-EXP430FR5969 it would be worth for me to buy SwiftX. Contact FORTH, Inc (support@forth.com). It is relatively easy to configure SwiftX for most configurations, providing they meet some minimum requirements and have a suitable connection for downloading a kernel. You have all the source available to you. The only limitation in the evaluation versions is on target program size, which is perfectly adequate to run the demo and other simple applications. Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-22 09:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <54e99db7$0$3068$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #36759 |
In article <GqqdnQMY48wBGnTJnZ2dnUU7-budnZ2d@supernews.com>, Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote: >On 2/21/15 12:33 PM, visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote: >> On Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 2:12:14 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >>> On 2/21/15 6:09 AM, visualforth.com wrote: >>>> On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 10:49:59 PM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: >... >>>> >>>> Elizabeth, >>>> Thanks for reassuring! >>>> I looked at http://www.forth.com and found a free "SwiftX MSP430 for the TI MSP430". My idea is to test >it with TI's G2 LaunchPad, so I downloaded Forth Inc.'s SwiftX MSP430 for the TI MSP430. >>>> >>>> I opened the swiftx-msp430.pdf and there it says: >>>> >>>> 1.3 Run Demo >>>> A demo application is included with most SwiftX systems. Follow the instructions in the SwiftX >Reference Manual, Section 1.5.3. >>>> >>>> But there is no "SwiftX Reference Manual". I googled for "SwiftX Reference Manual", but only references >to a "SwiftX Reference Manual" came up, no download. >>>> >>>> How shall I proceed? >>>> >>>> Something is missing there. >>> >>> It should be part of your download, in a folder labeled Doc, along with >>> the Forth Programmer's Handbook, the ANS Forth Standard, and an >>> MSP430-specific SwiftX manual. >>> >>> Running the demo application on a board requires the configuration to >>> match the board you have. SwiftX supports several of the most popular >>> boards for each microcontroller; if you have a different one, the MSP430 >>> manual should have information to help you configure it for your board. >>> If you need help, you may contact support@forth.com. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Elizabeth > >> >> The folder named Doc contains 8 files: >> swiftx.pdf > > ^ This is the SwiftX Reference Manual > >> swiftx-msp430.pdf > > ^ This is the MSP-430 Supplement to the SwiftX Reference Manual >describing configuration issues, the assembler, and processor-specific >features. > >> handbook.pdf > > ^ This is the Forth Programmer's Handbook (general reference manual on >Forth) > >> readme-eval.pdf > > ^ Getting started > >> license-eval.pdf > > ^ Legal T&C for the evaluation version > >> dpans94.pdf > > ^ ANS Forth Standard (Forth94) > >> embedding.gif >> homelogo.gif > > ^ The last two are graphics. > >> >> Seems to be that the "SwiftX Reference Manual" is hidden somewhere. I opened all files and I discovered >that swiftx.pdf seems to be the "SwiftX Reference Manual". >> >> May be it is for educational purposes that there is no hint. >> >> So I found the reference for starting, showing more educational stuff: >> >> 1.5.3 Running the Demo Application >> ...To run this program, launch SwiftX as described in Section 1.5.1 >> >> 1.5.1 Starting a Development Session >> Launch SwiftX as described in Section 1.4.2. >> >> 1.4.2 Launching SwiftX >> ... See Section 1.2 for a discussion of the SwiftX source directory organization. >> >> 1.2 Directory Structure >> The directory structure for the files provided with SwiftX is shown in Figure 1... See Section 1.4.2. >> >> I don't know if I ever will be able to start a first SwiftX demo on my G2 LaunchPad. >> >> The "SWIFTX MSP430 Target Reference Manual" doesn't mention a LaunchPad nor it's micro, the MSP430G2553, >anyway. The only MSP430 mentioned there is the MSP430F149. >> >> Is there a description somewhere how to get SwiftX running on TI's MSP430G2553 LaunchPad or any other of >TI's LaunchPads? May be on a FRAM LaunchPad? >> If SwiftX is available for TI's MSP-EXP430FR5969 it would be worth for me to buy SwiftX. > >Contact FORTH, Inc (support@forth.com). It is relatively easy to >configure SwiftX for most configurations, providing they meet some >minimum requirements and have a suitable connection for downloading a >kernel. You have all the source available to you. The only limitation in >the evaluation versions is on target program size, which is perfectly >adequate to run the demo and other simple applications. That is no task for a beginner. Instead, if you have a Launchpad, you should install 4e4th or noforth and are up and running in an evening. > >Cheers, >Elizabeth Groetjes Albert -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 12:07 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xue2541qv6dtjm@localhost> |
| In reply to | #36736 |
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 21:28:05 -0500, <visualforth@rocketmail.com> wrote: > And if so, is there a fork to Forth for microprocessors? No. This is the place on Usenet for Forth microprocessors. It's not the place for non-Forth processors, i.e., normal 'rickman' non-Forth microprocessor discussions. You may also find Forth related forums on the general internet or Google Groups. > I tried to find rules about content on c.l.f., but to now avail. > Are there any? Yes. The official Usenet charter for comp.lang.forth is: "Discussion about Forth." That used to be in a file called "comp.lang.forth.Z" in the repository of Usenet charters on ftp.uu.net. Rod Pemberton -- Cars kill more people than guns in the U.S. Yet, no one is trying to take away your car.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-20 19:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a3d4b0e4-f565-4a6b-b32c-4161569e0569@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36734 |
On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 5:12:02 PM UTC-8, Rod Pemberton wrote: > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:02:04 -0500, Michael Barry wrote: > > > Rod is very sharp, but has a tendency to use this sharpness in an > > abusive manner, [...] > > Since when? I only argue against people when they say something > that is clearly wrong, in order to get them to understand their > mistake ... > > [ ... detailed list of "trolls" ... ] > > Your only issue with discussing this is that you simply > haven't been here long enough to take note of these things. > > Rod Pemberton > Please accept my sincere apology for running my "mouth" earlier. I should realize that I am not qualified to be part of the solution, and it is certainly not my intention to contribute to the problem. I am here to learn, and I should be able to do that without stirring the pot. I have already learned a great deal from members of your troll list, even Passaniti. It serves no purpose for me to provoke you or anyone else here, so I will do my best to avoid doing so from now on. I will redouble my efforts to filter out the undesirable content quietly and follow the advice of my late grammie ... "If you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all". Thank you for not ripping my finger off because I waved it in your face. Mike
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 14:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1m07569.1it0oxc11b020uN%awegel@arcor.de> |
| In reply to | #36734 |
Rod Pemberton <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> wrote: > John Passaniti, was driven away some years ago. LOL - mobbed out by you and Hugh (in perfect harmony) would be a better term. At least you admit now that it was on purpose. @Michael: Better check the group archive than believe what Rod writes (or Hugh, for that matter).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 14:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1m076nd.jjy5vr1d7oxn2N%awegel@arcor.de> |
| In reply to | #36741 |
Alexander Wegel <awegel@arcor.de> wrote: > @Michael: Better check the group archive than believe what Rod writes > (or Hugh, for that matter). Oops - meant: @visualforth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 14:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1m076pe.u1wmec1pauzfgN%awegel@arcor.de> |
| In reply to | #36742 |
Alexander Wegel <awegel@arcor.de> wrote: > Alexander Wegel <awegel@arcor.de> wrote: > > > @Michael: Better check the group archive than believe what Rod writes > > (or Hugh, for that matter). > > Oops - meant: @visualforth Or better: @everyone
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | visualforth@rocketmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 07:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <77d7cce3-11a0-4f3e-9261-8dde284a9f15@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36742 |
On Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 8:24:18 AM UTC-5, Alexander Wegel wrote: > Alexander Wegel <awarcor.de> wrote: > > > @Michael: Better check the group archive than believe what Rod writes > > (or Hugh, for that matter). > > Oops - meant: @visualforth Thanks, Alexander! I was surprised and really liked to know if I am on the right place. Now you and Elizabeth reassured me. Thanks a lot!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-21 12:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xue5eqoxv6dtjm@localhost> |
| In reply to | #36741 |
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 08:22:29 -0500, Alexander Wegel <awegel@arcor.de> wrote: > Rod Pemberton <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> wrote: >> John Passaniti, was driven away some years ago. > > LOL - mobbed out by you and Hugh (in perfect harmony) would be > a better term. At least you admit now that it was on purpose. I don't recall ever denying driving him away. I don't normally attack people in that way, but the options were limited. I was a part of that. I still feel good about it. No one has to deal with him anymore, at least in that way. If it was someone nice, I wouldn't feel good about it. I think our response was just given the hostile circumstances that J.P created. Although, it wasn't planned as you might be implying. I just wanted John's verbal abuse at that time to stop. John didn't seem to respond to anything or respect anyone except those verbally abused him. That's a typical trait of bullies, psychopaths, Internet trolls, and masochists. How do you deal with someone like that? John attacked Hugh and then others who responded to both him and Hugh. Ms. Rather eventually defended John, thinking Hugh took things too far ... Can you blame her? Hugh attacks her relentlessly, without cause. Of course, Hugh also sees her as a figurehead of ANS Forth, and not as Ms. Rather the person and human being. Immediately after that happened, someone under an anonymous monicker appeared in another newsgroup. He attacked me in an even more atrocious and vicious manner. So, I assumed this to be J.P. > @Michael: Better check the group archive than believe what > Rod writes (or Hugh, for that matter). I don't know what you mean by that. AIR, it's all there. I don't believe I distorted or misrepresented the truth in any way. I admit my memory isn't perfect and is aging, but it always seems to be far more accurate than everyone else around ... Although, emotional events may affect my perception and recollection somewhat. I'm still not sure how you would know, since there was a decade gap where "you" as Alexander Wegel didn't post to c.l.f. Were you lurking for over a decade? Archives are good for searching for stuff, but not so good for general reading. I.e., I doubt that you actually read through that crap recently and you seem to be far more emotionally involved in it that you should be as an otherwise inactive participant. There are too many flare ups, flame wars, in the archives and that's not just limited to c.l.f. You took offense the last time I asked if you were J.P. Really, J.P. is the only one who would care about what happened J.P. He angered everyone here. In my mind, J.P. earned what he got. He incited what happened to him. His abuse was recored for over a decade before I came here, and it was just getting worse. Even some of the now deceased, long-term c.l.f. readers went to their graves not liking him. That's sad. Isn't it? So, the question still stands, it seems. Why the sudden interest in what happened in the past to J.P.? Is it just to attack Hugh (or me)? Why are you so sympathetic of what happened to J.P.? Why do you have such a strong emotional response to what happened to J.P.? Aren't you just J.P. under an alias and seeking revenge for what you caused? Rod Pemberton -- Cars kill more people than guns in the U.S. Yet, no one is trying to take away your car.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-23 20:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f5ebed5d-64aa-4f9e-a55a-ddf299ad7f4a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36750 |
On Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 10:55:26 AM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote: > On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 08:22:29 -0500, Alexander Wegel <awegel@arcor.de> > wrote: > > Rod Pemberton <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> wrote: > > >> John Passaniti, was driven away some years ago. > > > > LOL - mobbed out by you and Hugh (in perfect harmony) would be > > a better term. At least you admit now that it was on purpose. > > I don't recall ever denying driving him away. I don't normally > attack people in that way, but the options were limited. I was > a part of that. I still feel good about it. No one has to > deal with him anymore, at least in that way. John Passanati wasn't driven away. He was enjoying himself greatly --- faggot heaven! --- he had Elizabeth Rather and Bernd Payson who were willing to defend him and praise him, so long as he attacked somebody else. Because of the suddenness of Passaniti's disappearance, I have speculated that he got incarcerated in prison or in a psychiatric institution, and that he will be back to C.L.F. again after he is released. When Passaniti was on C.L.F. I speculated that Elizabeth Rather was paying him to attack her enemies for her. I was thinking of myself, of course. It is possible that Elizabeth Rather was only paying Passaniti to attack Jeff Fox however, and that when Jeff Fox died she stopped paying Passaniti and he left --- apparently she didn't consider attacking me to be important enough to pay Passaniti if that was all he was doing --- she was only willing to pay for Jeff Fox to be attacked. This is something I just thought of --- Passaniti's disappearance occurred not long after Jeff Fox's death, and Passaniti may have left because his only purpose here was to attack Jeff Fox. I had originally assumed that Elizabeth Rather was homosexual, because of her strident support for Passaniti --- the fact that she called me "homophobic" repeatedly seemed to imply that she was homosexual herself. Jeff Fox told me in private communication however, that she is not homosexual, but that she "uses" homosexuality as a weapon --- she can accuse people like me of being homophobic, and this is a guaranteed win for her, as there is no defense against her accusation. Beating people over the head with the politically-correct club is actually the standard liberal strategy --- the liberals routinely accuse their enemies of being homophobic, racist, etc. --- if the person is fool enough to respond by saying that he isn't what he is accused of, then he has already lost, because responding thusly grants the liberal the moral high-ground, and also because there is no way for him to prove that he isn't homophobic or racist or whatever, and so he is stuck in the moral low-ground forever waiting for the liberal to accept his feeble defenses. It is a small step to go from Elizabeth Rather "using" homosexuality, to her hiring a homosexual to attack people her enemies --- she can't accuse me of being homophobic unless she has a homosexual handy who can be the victim of my homophobia --- the liberals need victims, even if they have to hire them. > I'm still not sure how you would know, since there was a > decade gap where "you" as Alexander Wegel didn't post to > c.l.f. Were you lurking for over a decade? Archives are > good for searching for stuff, but not so good for general > reading. I.e., I doubt that you actually read through > that crap recently and you seem to be far more emotionally > involved in it that you should be as an otherwise inactive > participant. There are too many flare ups, flame wars, > in the archives and that's not just limited to c.l.f. > You took offense the last time I asked if you were J.P. > Really, J.P. is the only one who would care about what > happened J.P. He angered everyone here. In my mind, > J.P. earned what he got. He incited what happened to him. > His abuse was recored for over a decade before I came > here, and it was just getting worse. Even some of the > now deceased, long-term c.l.f. readers went to their > graves not liking him. That's sad. Isn't it? So, the > question still stands, it seems. Why the sudden interest > in what happened in the past to J.P.? Is it just to > attack Hugh (or me)? Why are you so sympathetic of what > happened to J.P.? Why do you have such a strong emotional > response to what happened to J.P.? Aren't you just J.P. > under an alias and seeking revenge for what you caused? I don't think Alex Wegel and John Passaniti are the same person. Passaniti posted Perl code routinely on C.L.F., but never posted any Forth code and seemed to know very little about Forth (his claim for expertise in Forth involved having written a "Forth-like interpreter in Perl"). By comparison, Alex Wegel has posted Forth code (pretty awful quality, but it was Forth) --- so I don't think Wegel is Passaniti, unless he has recently learned Forth. OTOH, Alex Wegel has posted Perl code on C.L.F.: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/3Y4w_MdYl0k Also, I have noticed that Alex Wegel seems to be over-concerned with John Passaniti --- he says that poor innocent Passaniti was "mobbed" --- nobody has ever said that before! Bernd Payson and Elizabeth Rather liked how Passaniti attacked their enemies, but even they would have to admit that he was the attacker --- describing Passaniti as a victim getting mobbed is an incredible stretch of the truth, even by C.L.F. standards which aren't high. So maybe Wegel and Passaniti are actually the same person --- on the internet, you never can tell (empty-buffers claims to be zbignie). I don't really care all that much --- they can both go to hell, and Rod Pemberton too --- I am mostly interested in writing Forth code, such as my novice package, which I will have an update for pretty soon.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-24 03:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xujxvwt7v6dtjm@localhost> |
| In reply to | #36786 |
On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 23:45:15 -0500, <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: > John Passanati wasn't driven away. I disagree. > He was enjoying himself greatly --- I don't doubt that. Usenet archives show he viciously trolled for over a decade. > faggot heaven! Are you saying you think he died? Or, are you just being homophobic? > --- he had Elizabeth Rather and Bernd Payson who were willing to > defend him and praise him, so long as he attacked somebody else. Perhaps. > Because of the suddenness of Passaniti's disappearance, > I have speculated that he got incarcerated in prison or > in a psychiatric institution, and that he will be back > to C.L.F. again after he is released. So, you don't think he died ... Interesting. > When Passaniti was on C.L.F. I speculated that Elizabeth Rather > was paying him to attack her enemies for her. Without justification, that would seem ... insane. > I was thinking of myself, of course. It is possible that Elizabeth > Rather was only paying Passaniti to attack Jeff Fox however, and > that when Jeff Fox died she stopped paying Passaniti and he left > --- apparently she didn't consider attacking me to be important > enough to pay Passaniti if that was all he was doing --- she was > only willing to pay for Jeff Fox to be attacked. That's rather warped. I seriously doubt she cares enough about you to pay someone to do that. > This is something I just thought of --- Passaniti's disappearance > occurred not long after Jeff Fox's death, and Passaniti may have left > because his only purpose here was to attack Jeff Fox. So, attacking you wasn't one of his purposes? What about attacking others? You keep contradicting yourself. Do you even realize this? Keep talking. > I had originally assumed that Elizabeth Rather was homosexual, because > of her strident support for Passaniti --- the fact that she called me > "homophobic" repeatedly seemed to imply that she was homosexual herself. Are you irrational any? > Jeff Fox told me in [a] private communication however, [...] It's so hard to verify. Is there a reason you didn't simply say "email." > [...] that she is not homosexual, but that she "uses" homosexuality as a > weapon --- she can accuse people like me of being homophobic, and this is > a guaranteed win for her, as there is no defense against her accusation. > Beating people over the head with the politically-correct club is > actually > the standard liberal strategy --- the liberals routinely accuse their > enemies of being homophobic, racist, etc. --- if the person is fool > enough > to respond by saying that he isn't what he is accused of, then he has > already lost, because responding thusly grants the liberal the moral > high-ground, and also because there is no way for him to prove that he > isn't homophobic or racist or whatever, and so he is stuck in the moral > low-ground forever waiting for the liberal to accept his feeble defenses. What does any of this have to do with Forth? Sorry, let me rephrase that: Do you intend to have a purpose other than posting rambling, chaotic, rants? You repeatedly say you just want to code Forth, but these rants must be consuming 3 to 5 hours of your personal time per day just to post this crap. Why are you so concerned with Ms. Rathers sexuality? Why does it matter to you if an old woman, post-menopause, i.e, non-sexual, was homosexual? Now, you're exhibiting traits like Alex ... I.e., caring about things which shouldn't be of any interest to you because they don't concern you in any way. Sociopaths have problems respecting or recognizing boundaries. > It is a small step to go from Elizabeth Rather "using" homosexuality, to > her hiring a homosexual to attack people her enemies --- she can't > accuse me of being homophobic unless she has a homosexual handy who can > be the victim of my homophobia --- the liberals need victims, even if > they have to hire them. So, since J.P. is not around, she can't call you homophobic any more? Wrong. You already established that moniker as valid. Just what do you smoke? I.e., this is utterly irrational insanity. > I don't think Alex Wegel and John Passaniti are the same person. Perhaps, but he is intensely emotional over the issue in much the same way that J.P. overreacted abusively and took things personally. He cares about the issue as if he is J.P. and still hurt, or someone exceptionally close to J.P who was hurt. He's not acting like a 3rd party who has no personal connection to the issue. > Passaniti posted Perl code routinely on C.L.F., [...] Did you forget? It wasn't just Perl ... He was much like rickman in this regard, i.e., posting about non-Forth topics and polluting other threads. > [...] but never posted any Forth code [...] OMG! You actually cited that? Alex doesn't post any Forth code. Bernd doesn't post any Forth code. Hugh (you) doesn't post any Forth code. See a pattern? Trolls don't post Forth code. > and seemed to know very little about Forth Feigned? Did J.P. know something, anything, about Forth? It seems that you're implying he does or did, although just stated that he "never posted any Forth code." So, just how would you be able to determine this? > OTOH, Alex Wegel has posted Perl code on C.L.F.: Proof? > Also, I have noticed that Alex Wegel seems to be over-concerned with > John Passaniti --- he says that poor innocent Passaniti was "mobbed" --- > nobody has ever said that before! BINGO! BINGO! BINGO! BINGO! BINGO! > [...] describing Passaniti as a victim getting mobbed is an incredible > stretch of the truth, even by C.L.F. standards [...] I agree. > I don't really care all that much --- they can both go to hell, > and Rod Pemberton too [...] Yeah, you're demonstrating those psychopath traits again. Meds? > [...] --- I am mostly interested in writing Forth code, [...] It's pretty clear that you're mostly interested in posting nonsense rants and attacking Ms. Rather in irrational ways. Rod Pemberton -- Cars kill more people than guns in the U.S. Yet, no one is trying to take away your car.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | awegel@arcor.de (Alexander Wegel) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-24 06:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1m0bwxw.1la45dftfxzueN%awegel@arcor.de> |
| In reply to | #36750 |
Rod Pemberton <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> wrote: > On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 08:22:29 -0500, Alexander Wegel <awegel@arcor.de> > wrote: > > Rod Pemberton <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> wrote: > > >> John Passaniti, was driven away some years ago. > > > > LOL - mobbed out by you and Hugh (in perfect harmony) would be > > a better term. At least you admit now that it was on purpose. > > I don't recall ever denying driving him away. I don't normally > attack people in that way, but the options were limited. I was > a part of that. I still feel good about it. No one has to > deal with him anymore, at least in that way. If it was someone > nice, I wouldn't feel good about it. I think our response was > just given the hostile circumstances that J.P created. Although, > it wasn't planned as you might be implying. I just wanted John's > verbal abuse at that time to stop. John didn't seem to respond > to anything or respect anyone except those verbally abused him. > That's a typical trait of bullies, psychopaths, Internet trolls, > and masochists. How do you deal with someone like that? John > attacked Hugh and then others who responded to both him and Hugh. > Ms. Rather eventually defended John, thinking Hugh took things > too far ... Can you blame her? Hugh attacks her relentlessly, > without cause. Of course, Hugh also sees her as a figurehead > of ANS Forth, and not as Ms. Rather the person and human being. > Immediately after that happened, someone under an anonymous > monicker appeared in another newsgroup. He attacked me in > an even more atrocious and vicious manner. So, I assumed > this to be J.P. > > > @Michael: Better check the group archive than believe what > > Rod writes (or Hugh, for that matter). > > I don't know what you mean by that. AIR, it's all there. > I don't believe I distorted or misrepresented the truth > in any way. I admit my memory isn't perfect and is aging, > but it always seems to be far more accurate than everyone > else around ... Although, emotional events may affect my > perception and recollection somewhat. > > I'm still not sure how you would know, since there was a > decade gap where "you" as Alexander Wegel didn't post to > c.l.f. Were you lurking for over a decade? Archives are > good for searching for stuff, but not so good for general > reading. I.e., I doubt that you actually read through > that crap recently and you seem to be far more emotionally > involved in it that you should be as an otherwise inactive > participant. There are too many flare ups, flame wars, > in the archives and that's not just limited to c.l.f. > You took offense the last time I asked if you were J.P. > Really, J.P. is the only one who would care about what > happened J.P. He angered everyone here. In my mind, > J.P. earned what he got. He incited what happened to him. > His abuse was recored for over a decade before I came > here, and it was just getting worse. Even some of the > now deceased, long-term c.l.f. readers went to their > graves not liking him. That's sad. Isn't it? So, the > question still stands, it seems. Why the sudden interest > in what happened in the past to J.P.? Is it just to > attack Hugh (or me)? Why are you so sympathetic of what > happened to J.P.? Why do you have such a strong emotional > response to what happened to J.P.? Aren't you just J.P. > under an alias and seeking revenge for what you caused? You think you can speak for everyone in this newsgroup, even justify your mobbing as a service to all here? So take that: You can't speak for me, and surely not for everyone here. To address your lengthy text: IMO it's mostly irrelevant and/or wrong, though you might actually believe some of it yourself. PS: No, i'm not JP, but i do think it's a shame what you (and Hugh) did and are still doing!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-24 03:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xujxwa2jv6dtjm@localhost> |
| In reply to | #36788 |
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 00:42:17 -0500, Alexander Wegel <awegel@arcor.de> wrote: > You think you can speak for everyone in this newsgroup, I don't know what you're talking about. Where and when did I speak for someone else? Others here are just as capable of speaking. If they don't, you should take that as a sign that they agree with what was said, or they simply don't care, or they've lumped you into the group of assholes. > even justify your mobbing as a service to all here? Who did I mob? I didn't even mob J.P. I was acting solely as an individual. I already told you that. Apparently, "mobbing" is your negative term for me being an active participant in a conversation involving a group. Am I, Hugh, and others mobbing you now because others here are simply involved in this thread? If so, that ranks as one of the absolute dumbest things I've ever heard in my life. STFU. > You can't speak for me, and surely not for everyone here. When and where did I do that? > To address your lengthy text: IMO it's mostly irrelevant > and/or wrong, though you might actually believe some of > it yourself. Third time. Why do you care so much? How would you know? I.e., you shouldn't care and shouldn't know, unless you're J.P. or a sociopathic empath. E.g., you're not normal. > PS: No, i'm not JP, . > but i do think it's a shame what you > (and Hugh) did and are still doing! Are you delusional? I'm clearly *NOT* working with Hugh. I guess you don't read Hugh's posts _OR_ mine ... Why is it a shame to get the assholes who made c.l.f. a hostile place to leave? Do you think they actually have something to contribute? When they're not inciting people on non-Forth topics, actual Forth conversations take place here. Do you even realize that you're making c.l.f. a hostile place? You're bringing up past events, long since dead, that no one wants repeated, discussing a guy everyone hated. Do you think other people are going to read yours if you continue down this path? Rod Pemberton -- Cars kill more people than guns in the U.S. Yet, no one is trying to take away your car.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-23 16:59 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8795d981-a473-4387-8564-0481b6e9c16e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36734 |
On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 6:12:02 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote: > The worst of them, John Passaniti, was driven away some > years ago. ... Bernd Paysan told him to leave for over a decade. Think > about that. It was really a bad scene dude, until I got > here ... When you got here, you made it worse. Anyway, Bernd Payson never told Passaniti to leave. They were a team like Skipper and Gilligan --- they would engage in lengthy threads discussing subjects such as chip design that Passaniti knows nothing about (he is a Perl programmer) --- it was like the Village People, except that Passaniti wanted to be a computer programmer, rather than a policeman or Indian chief. Here we have the butt-buddies working together as a team: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/w3tHPsTaZvE > E.g., Hugh Aquilar, the guy you just responded to, attacks > the elderly Ms. Rather without provocation or any justification > repeatedly and for about a decade now. This is probably the > only post in a while where he hasn't attacked, because he > decided to attack me. When she was a victim in a hit and run, > right after she came out of the hospital, Hugh wished that she > would've died in the accident! How cruel is that? That's > a true asshole. I never wished her dead. This is the thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.lang.forth/zbigniew/comp.lang.forth/0mEA2lSLiCE/93nEcVbiJ_MJ When she was bragging about suing Apple for using the word "swift," I said that this was an unjustified lawsuit --- everybody else said: "go get'em Lizzie." After the murder attempt on Elizabeth Rather (what you euphemistically describe as a hit-and-run accident), I said that lobbing unjustified lawsuits at deep-pocket targets is a bad idea because it can get a person murdered. A lot of sociopaths think that unjustified lawsuits are easy money. They can sue for $1,000,000, then settle for $10,000. The idea is that the corporation getting sued will spend over $10,000 in attorney fees if the lawsuit goes to court, and will have no guarantee of winning in court, so it is less expensive and less risky to just settle out of court for $10,000. The flaw in this plan, is that it typically costs less than $10,000 to have somebody murdered. The corporation doesn't want to set a precedent of paying off the sociopaths who attack it with lawsuits, because this will encourage more attacks, so it makes sense for them to just kill the bastards (or bitches, as the case may be) --- red rum costs less, and makes a statement! I'm not necessarily saying that it was Apple that attempted to kill Elizabeth Rather, although the timing does seem more than coincidental --- Elizabeth Rather hasn't told us how many unjustified lawsuits she has going, or how many customers she has scammed --- there may be hundreds of suspects. Anyway, I didn't wish Elizabeth Rather dead. I discouraged her from her unjustified lawsuits in an effort to save her dumb life --- everybody else was encouraging her.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-24 03:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xujxvrg2v6dtjm@localhost> |
| In reply to | #36781 |
On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 19:59:19 -0500, <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 6:12:02 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote: >> The worst of them, John Passaniti, was driven away some >> years ago. ... Bernd Paysan told him to leave for over a decade. Think >> about that. It was really a bad scene dude, until I got >> here ... > > When you got here, you made it worse. > > Anyway, Bernd Payson never told Passaniti to leave. Go back further, before I starting posting here (and probably you too). > They were a team like Skipper and Gilligan --- they would engage in > lengthy threads discussing subjects such as chip design that Passaniti > knows nothing about (he is a Perl programmer) --- it was like the > Village People, except that Passaniti wanted to be a computer > programmer, rather than a policeman or Indian chief. Bernd periodically forgets who he hates, only to remember a day, a week, a month or sometimes two later. He's had long conversations with me too, apparently completely clueless of it, even though I use my real name. Or, perhaps, he just doesn't check names on every post. The first time he attacked me for no apparent reason. I still have no idea why. There is no indication in the thread. >> E.g., Hugh Aquilar, the guy you just responded to, attacks >> the elderly Ms. Rather without provocation or any justification >> repeatedly and for about a decade now. This is probably the >> only post in a while where he hasn't attacked, because he >> decided to attack me. When she was a victim in a hit and run, >> right after she came out of the hospital, Hugh wished that she >> would've died in the accident! How cruel is that? That's >> a true asshole. > > I never wished her dead. Ok. > After the murder attempt on Elizabeth Rather Although most likely, that wasn't proven. They sent her attacker to a mental hospital. > (what you euphemistically describe as a hit-and-run accident) That is what it was too. It's not a euphemism. > A lot of sociopaths think that unjustified lawsuits are easy money. You frequently say you don't care about people here, including in your other post. That's a trait of psychopaths. So, when you call other people sociopaths and psychopaths, I find it both funny and contradictory. You say so many contradictory things that the truth of your opinions is never known, except for your relentless attacks on Ms. Rather. > [Yet another Ms. Rather attack] > > Anyway, I didn't wish Elizabeth Rather dead. ... > I discouraged her from her unjustified lawsuits in an effort > to save her dumb life --- everybody else was encouraging her. Ok. You understand that makes absolutely no sense, yes? Rod Pemberton -- Cars kill more people than guns in the U.S. Yet, no one is trying to take away your car.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-20 14:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5b014b0e-1a17-46d8-ad58-ea87a93c5946@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36728 |
On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 1:45:44 PM UTC-8, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > > ... and I thought that you were wrong anyway because water neither > compresses nor expands when it is in liquid form --- > [ ... ] Water does compress and expand when it is in liquid form, but not enough to matter in an automotive cooling system application. > [ ... ] > Rod's standard tactic is to purposefully misinterpret somebody's > post to make the person look like an idiot, and draw the person > into long tedious explanations of how he isn't actually an idiot. > [ ... ] Rod is very sharp, but has a tendency to use this sharpness in an abusive manner, not unlike some others on this group (I hestitate to drop any names, but I think they know who they are). I am not really equipped to compete in pissing contests, so my normal tactic when pissed on is to make a single snide comment and move on. I haven't had to do that here yet, and I'm thankful. Mike
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <buzz@notnotnontnooatno.cmm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-20 20:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.xudu1ii1v6dtjm@localhost> |
| In reply to | #36728 |
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 16:45:43 -0500, <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: > Note that I never said you had Asperger's Syndrom, autism, or even > that you were "extremely introverted" --- And, neither did I. Where did I say she has Aperger's, autism, or introversion? I never said that. I simply asked her two questions. Stop putting words in my mouth, asshole. I was also polite in providing her with information on the topics, if she was unfamiliar with the topics so that if the answers to those questions happened to apply to her or her friends or relatives, she'd be informed. Apparently, they don't apply to her. If you can't comprehend that Hugh, you shouldn't be reading. > Rod's standard tactic is to purposefully misinterpret somebody's > post to make the person look like an idiot, [...] That's a lie. You spew out all sorts of crap without thinking about it and without expecting anyone to read it. When someone points out that you're wrong or you've contradicted yourself numerous times, you take offense. Also, some people, like you, don't write what they thought they wrote. Some people, like you, like you just did, make assumptions about what was written too. Bernd is notorious for this. He writes one thing and claims it means something else when asked. Rod Pemberton -- Cars kill more people than guns in the U.S. Yet, no one is trying to take away your car.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-19 12:06 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <qaydnUKbQKfUw3vJnZ2dnUU7-KWdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #36682 |
On 2/19/15 12:29 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > Yes, I'm aware I don't always put comma's and question > marks inside quotes, as it's common for many programmers > to NOT do so, including most people here. Thanks, Rod, I agree with most of your observations. But I have a couple of picky issues with the paragraph above: First, we don't use apostrophes to make plurals, so the issue is about commas and question marks inside quotes. Second, IMO the placement of commas, periods, and question marks with respect to quotes depends on whether the quoted word or words is part of the sentence: He said, "This is easy!" (quotes contain a sentence) The correct spelling is "commas". (quotes contain just a special term) Cheers, Elizabeth -- ================================================== Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 http://www.forth.com "Forth-based products and Services for real-time applications since 1973." ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web