Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #38115 > unrolled thread
| Started by | lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-04-11 01:16 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-04-30 02:35 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 169 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-11 01:16 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-04-11 15:56 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-11 15:48 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-11 17:43 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-04-14 18:40 +1000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-04-22 19:23 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 13:28 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-04-22 22:29 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 16:01 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-04-22 23:20 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 00:28 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 02:30 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-23 09:57 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-23 11:28 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 09:31 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-23 13:32 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 10:56 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 11:12 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-04-23 22:44 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 23:24 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-24 09:21 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-24 11:44 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-24 08:35 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-24 15:40 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? mhx@iae.nl - 2015-04-24 10:28 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-24 17:43 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? mhx@iae.nl - 2015-04-24 22:44 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-04-24 15:00 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-24 09:07 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 07:30 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 11:02 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-23 16:30 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 09:38 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-24 15:57 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-04-24 15:14 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 06:58 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-04-23 14:47 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-04-23 08:34 -1000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-13 12:32 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-13 21:57 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-13 19:25 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-04-14 01:43 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-04-14 01:45 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-14 10:12 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-04-14 13:09 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-15 14:18 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-04-15 22:13 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-15 23:14 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 01:12 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 01:23 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 14:28 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 14:37 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 04:43 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-14 14:53 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 00:34 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 00:54 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 01:07 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-16 12:22 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 08:32 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-16 20:42 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 00:14 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-16 22:14 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Bernd Linsel <bl1@gmx.com> - 2015-04-17 17:43 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-17 20:46 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-18 06:54 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 06:52 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-18 22:14 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-19 08:46 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 06:04 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-19 10:12 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 10:43 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 16:28 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 15:35 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 19:14 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 16:48 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-20 09:51 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-20 06:27 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-20 13:04 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-20 14:09 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-21 07:17 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-21 16:50 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-21 16:35 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 06:13 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 06:23 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-21 17:18 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-21 16:38 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-22 10:12 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 06:26 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-04-20 08:46 -1000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 23:02 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-21 06:35 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-21 06:41 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-20 10:22 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 23:28 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-21 11:03 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2015-04-21 07:20 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-22 15:35 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2015-04-23 10:55 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-24 07:15 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Bernd Linsel <bl1@gmx.com> - 2015-04-20 17:52 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 09:03 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-04-22 08:33 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 02:20 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-04-22 11:35 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-20 17:50 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 01:45 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 02:37 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-17 10:14 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-17 10:18 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-17 09:38 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-17 21:25 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-18 07:51 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 08:45 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-04-19 16:24 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 09:58 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-19 19:00 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 12:27 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-04-19 19:42 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 13:49 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-20 09:39 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 17:59 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 16:39 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-20 04:58 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 08:52 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-20 18:04 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-20 19:05 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-24 10:06 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-24 19:18 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-24 11:43 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-24 22:03 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-26 20:05 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-26 21:05 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-26 15:08 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-27 00:17 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-27 03:55 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-04-26 22:25 -1000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-29 08:53 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-29 09:35 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? mhx@iae.nl - 2015-04-29 10:14 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-04-29 09:00 -1000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-29 13:22 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-10 22:50 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-05-10 22:53 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> - 2015-04-26 23:04 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-26 20:51 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-27 09:38 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-27 23:18 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> - 2015-04-28 03:19 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-27 12:33 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-27 23:31 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-28 08:07 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-04-28 10:20 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-04-28 12:17 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-04-28 14:04 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2015-04-28 14:49 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-04-28 22:56 +0100
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 23:22 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-17 13:44 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-04-18 00:31 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-18 14:22 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-18 22:51 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 01:25 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-04-19 21:12 +0200
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 12:56 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 17:53 -0400
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-04-20 11:59 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-27 00:33 +0000
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-19 08:31 -0700
Re: How efficient are locals? How portable? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-30 02:35 -0700
Page 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-29 13:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c148fd49-52de-452e-abbc-f5c06dcaf78e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38715 |
On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 12:00:45 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > On 4/29/15 2:53 AM, Doug Hoffman wrote: > > On 4/27/15 4:25 AM, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > >> a) Not many Forthers used locals in 1990 > >> > >> b) Not many Forthers used FP in 1990. > > Indeed. I was just attempting to answer the question of why locals > support was limited in Forth94. Earlier in this thread you said: On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 11:46:21 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > I don't personally care, I hate locals :-) You are just imposing your own personal bias on the entire Forth community. When you say, "Not many Forthers used locals in 1990," you are referring to the employees of Forth Inc., whose only knowledge of Forth came from your class that you teach --- the fact that they worked for Forth Inc. implies that they know nothing about Forth and less about computer science --- their opinion is worthless. Later in this thread you said: On Thursday, April 23, 2015 at 11:34:28 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > People are much too phobic about real variables. The cry, "They aren't > re-entrant" simply means you have to look at the whole application and > how it is organized. A well-designed application with a graphics > component can avoid conflicts. You are always spouting meaningless drivel such as: "you have to look at the whole application and how it is organized." Well, shoot! Why didn't you tell us before? We would have never thought of this on our own! Apparently, reentrancy is one of the many aspects of computer science that you are ignorant of --- you are an ignoramus --- your opinion is worthless.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-10 22:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fb5bf303-44a7-40f6-963d-96ad34e313c6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38719 |
On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 1:22:55 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 12:00:45 PM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > On 4/29/15 2:53 AM, Doug Hoffman wrote: > > > On 4/27/15 4:25 AM, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > >> a) Not many Forthers used locals in 1990 > > >> > > >> b) Not many Forthers used FP in 1990. > > > > Indeed. I was just attempting to answer the question of why locals > > support was limited in Forth94. > > Earlier in this thread you said: > On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 11:46:21 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > I don't personally care, I hate locals :-) > > You are just imposing your own personal bias on the entire Forth community. > > When you say, "Not many Forthers used locals in 1990," you are referring to the employees of Forth Inc., whose only knowledge of Forth came from your class that you teach --- the fact that they worked for Forth Inc. implies that they know nothing about Forth and less about computer science --- their opinion is worthless. > > Later in this thread you said: > On Thursday, April 23, 2015 at 11:34:28 AM UTC-7, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote: > > People are much too phobic about real variables. The cry, "They aren't > > re-entrant" simply means you have to look at the whole application and > > how it is organized. A well-designed application with a graphics > > component can avoid conflicts. > > You are always spouting meaningless drivel such as: "you have to look at the whole application and how it is organized." > Well, shoot! Why didn't you tell us before? We would have never thought of this on our own! > > Apparently, reentrancy is one of the many aspects of computer science that you are ignorant of --- you are an ignoramus --- your opinion is worthless. Actually, I was giving Elizabeth Rather more credit than she deserves when I described her argument as "meaningless drivel." It is actually much worse than that --- this is her on-going effort to convince people that every program has to be written entirely from scratch --- that no general-purpose data-structures can be used. If a programmer is going to, "look at the whole application and how it is organized," then the programmer needs to have the source-code for the whole application --- this means that there can't be any libraries of code used in the application --- everything in the application has to be written from scratch (or, at least, cut and paste in from old programs). This is not the way that commercial programs are written however --- this is the way that toy programs are written.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-10 22:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3ad4146b-b98e-4dc7-80e2-1ddf4408ed17@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38957 |
On Sunday, May 10, 2015 at 10:50:50 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > If a programmer is going to, "look at the whole application and how it is organized," then the programmer needs to have the source-code for the whole application --- this means that there can't be any libraries of code used in the application --- everything in the application has to be written from scratch (or, at least, cut and paste in from old programs). > > This is not the way that commercial programs are written however --- this is the way that toy programs are written. Actually, this is the way that COBOL programs are written --- Elizabeth Rather's only programming experience prior to becoming the self-proclaimed "leading expert" of Forth, was as a COBOL programmer --- she still has the mindset of a COBOL programmer, and has spent her entire life trying to impose the COBOL mindset on the Forth community.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-26 23:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.xxqdhnthwa0t4m@localhost> |
| In reply to | #38621 |
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 18:08:36 -0400, <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: [Hey, I wrapped your lines for you.] > On a related matter, I consider TO to be a mistake in itself. In my > language, I will get rid of VALUE (formally known as ITEM) as useless > cruft. It doesn't provide any functionality that wasn't already > available with variables; it actually provides less functionality > because it is limited to cell-size variables and it doesn't allow the > address to be passed around or used in calculations. I will also make > local variables provide their address, so they can be accessed with ! > and @ getting rid of TO there also. The local variables will be big > enough, so they can store either single-cell or double-cell values or > floats (they don't have to be declared to be of any type, like in the > overly-complicated Forth-200x system). Then, your Forth won't be useful or ANS. If it's not ANS, who is going to use it? If it's not useful, won't they decide to forgo it's use too? ISTM, that no one will use it except for you. Is that acceptable to you? If not, what then is your reason for coding yet another Forth that no one is going to use? It won't replace gForth. You'll refuse to sell it, like VFX. You'll come to hate that your name is associated with it, like Bernd. My advice is that you stop where you currently are: at the planning and rambling thought stage. You've been talking about this for almost a decade with no action on your end, so far. I can't see how this will ever be a win-win for you. Since you know Forth and claim you've implemented a Forth, you'd probably learn more by attempting to implement a C compiler. Seriously, Hugh, do you think about what you write prior to posting it? It seems like I'm always commenting on the logic failures in your chaotic ramblings, yet you make no attempt to improve. > I remember when TO was first introduced in "Forth Dimensions" in the > late 1980s. It originally worked with CONSTANT values. I thought it was > a dumb idea then too --- people treat Forth like a science-fair project, > coming up with these goofy extensions, but they have little or no > interest in writing programs in Forth so they don't care if any of these > extensions have any practical value or not. Aren't you placing the blame on the wrong people or person? What about Forth allows people to "[come] up with these goofy extensions" in the first place? Isn't it the lack of syntax in Forth, the lack of language structure, the one thing about Forth that is *praised* by just about everyone here? If Forth was C, just what "goofy extensions" would be allowed in Forth? You regularly criticize Anton Ertl for using C to implement Forth, but then you turn around and describe numerous ways to capture the essence of C as Forth, or it's implementation. It's this that I recognize as a contradiction. > [...] Alex's howling and gnashing of teeth [...] Did you just call Alex a hell hound? ... 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 | 2015-04-26 20:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c86ec71e-e9a8-461e-91a2-92439eed739f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38629 |
On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 8:04:18 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote: > On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 18:08:36 -0400, <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: > > I remember when TO was first introduced in "Forth Dimensions" in the > > late 1980s. It originally worked with CONSTANT values. I thought it was > > a dumb idea then too --- people treat Forth like a science-fair project, > > coming up with these goofy extensions, but they have little or no > > interest in writing programs in Forth so they don't care if any of these > > extensions have any practical value or not. > > Aren't you placing the blame on the wrong people or person? What about > Forth allows people to "[come] up with these goofy extensions" in the > first place? Isn't it the lack of syntax in Forth, the lack of language > structure, the one thing about Forth that is *praised* by just about > everyone here? TO is syntax.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-27 09:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2015Apr27.113818@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #38629 |
"Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> writes:
>On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 18:08:36 -0400, <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>[Hey, I wrapped your lines for you.]
>
>> On a related matter, I consider TO to be a mistake in itself. In my
>> language, I will get rid of VALUE (formally known as ITEM) as useless
>> cruft. It doesn't provide any functionality that wasn't already
>> available with variables; it actually provides less functionality
>> because it is limited to cell-size variables and it doesn't allow the
>> address to be passed around or used in calculations. I will also make
>> local variables provide their address, so they can be accessed with !
>> and @ getting rid of TO there also. The local variables will be big
>> enough, so they can store either single-cell or double-cell values or
>> floats (they don't have to be declared to be of any type, like in the
>> overly-complicated Forth-200x system).
>
>Then, your Forth won't be useful or ANS.
VALUE and TO are CORE EXT, so a system without these words can be ANS
Forth (Forth-94) compliant. Concerning usefulness, I certainly prefer
Forth systems that can run a wide variety of standard Forth code out
of the box, but it sure is possible to make good use of a system
without VALUE or TO.
>If it's not ANS, who is going
>to use it?
That has not stopped Turbo Pascal from becoming the most popular
Pascal around. But I guess standard Forth did turn out more useful
than standard Pascal.
As for Hugh's announcements of his Forth, he's apparently still at the
requirements engineering stage. Of course, other (worse?) Forth
systems continue to be used while his Forth is still vapour, but who
knows, maybe once he actually implements it, it will take the world by
storm.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2014: http://www.euroforth.org/ef14/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-27 23:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b9b1b304-5731-4b11-85c6-b7550263bdf0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38645 |
On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 3:03:54 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote: > "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> writes: > >If it's not ANS, who is going > >to use it? > > That has not stopped Turbo Pascal from becoming the most popular > Pascal around. But I guess standard Forth did turn out more useful > than standard Pascal. LOL --- what planet did ANS-Forth turn out to be useful on? ANS-Forth killed the Forth language. My experience with telling people that I'm a Forth programmer, is that they almost always think that I'm mispronouncing "Fortran." Forth is extremely obscure --- it is dead. > As for Hugh's announcements of his Forth, he's apparently still at the > requirements engineering stage. Of course, other (worse?) Forth > systems continue to be used while his Forth is still vapour, but who > knows, maybe once he actually implements it, it will take the world by > storm. ANS-Forth was written in stone in 1994. The entire ANS-Forth standard was developed without anybody writing a reference compiler. ANS-Forth was never tested before it was committed to ANSI, which is why it has so many bugs. It wasn't until 1997 that SwiftForth came out, and version-1 was so bug-ridden as to be completely useless. Version-2 was bug-ridden too --- (LOCAL) would crash the system. All in all, I don't think that Elizabeth Rather's cult members are anybody to criticize me for taking my time with coming out with my language. Also, I don't think that you personally are anybody to criticize me. Gforth has never been used for any commercial application, and it never will be. Gforth is too slow. The primary application area for Forth is micro-controllers, but you crippled Gforth by sabotaging FIND so that it would abort when given certain words --- you did this on purpose to prevent Gforth from being used for cross-compilers, making it useless for micro-controllers --- by doing this however, you relegated Gforth to being a toy language used by your students for writing Soduku solvers, or whatever it is that they do for homework. You have never written code for a board that was sold for money, and neither will your students --- you are a school teacher --- just a baby-sitter for a gaggle of kids, and you use Gforth to keep them busy. Also, what does "take the world by storm" mean? My MFX was used at Testra to write their motion-control program, and they have been selling those motion-control boards for 20 years. But this wasn't much of a storm, as nobody ever cared that the code was Forth rather than C or assembly-language or whatever. I don't really know what taking the world by storm would be like. If I write a compiler and give it away for free and a lot of people use it, would that be a storm? There is no money in this for me, so what would be the point? I don't think there is any money to be made in compiler writing. There is no storm to take the world by. The only way to make money is by selling boards.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-28 03:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.xxsjy6gowa0t4m@localhost> |
| In reply to | #38675 |
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 02:18:00 -0400, <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 3:03:54 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote: >> "Rod Pemberton" <bork@lllljunkqwer.cpm> writes: >> >If it's not ANS, who is going to use it? >> >> That has not stopped Turbo Pascal from becoming the most popular >> Pascal around. But I guess standard Forth did turn out more useful >> than standard Pascal. > > LOL --- what planet did ANS-Forth turn out to be useful on? Um, yeah ... definately not on *YOUR* planet ... >> As for Hugh's announcements of his Forth, he's apparently still at the >> requirements engineering stage. Of course, other (worse?) Forth >> systems continue to be used while his Forth is still vapour, but who >> knows, maybe once he actually implements it, it will take the world by >> storm. > > ANS-Forth was written in stone in 1994. Tombstone? R.I.P.? Do you have a picture of that? Does it have the date on it too? Marble or granite? > The entire ANS-Forth standard was developed without anybody writing > a reference compiler. ANS-Forth was never tested before it was committed > to ANSI, which is why it has so many bugs. It wasn't until 1997 that > SwiftForth came out, and version-1 was so bug-ridden as to be completely > useless. Version-2 was bug-ridden too --- (LOCAL) would crash the system. ... > All in all, I don't think that Elizabeth Rather's cult members are > anybody > to criticize me for taking my time with coming out with my language. Are you implying I'm part of Ms. Rather's cult? That's a shock to me. I didn't realize that I joined a cult. I wonder when that happened. Who slipped me the purple Kool-Aid? I'm also surprised that anyone here would consider me, a rather strong supporter of C, to be one of her supposed pro-ANS Forth minions. It's probably a shock to her too that I now support Forth, that she has minions, and she now runs a cult. Were you aware you ran a cult Ms. Rather? Does the government tax our cult correctly? ROFL! What cult Hugh? If you meant Anton, I'm sure he's surprised that he's part of a cult run by Ms. Rather too! He must tele-cult to the U.S. from the E.U. ... > Also, I don't think that you personally are anybody to criticize me. Was this to Anton or to me? > Gforth has never been used for any commercial application, and it never > will be. Gforth is too slow. Ok, to Anton ... > The primary application area for Forth is micro-controllers, [...] So, you admit that Forth is *not* a general-purpose language? ... > Also, what does "take the world by storm" mean? Rapid. Disruptive. Conquering. Was that rhetorical? ... Sorry. > If I write a compiler and give it away for free and a lot of people > use it, would that be a storm? There is no money in this for me, > so what would be the point? You hate VFX for being commercial. So, giving your Forth away is the best way to attack what you hate. Yes, that's irrational. So, I expect that's what you'll do. Am I wrong? Do you intend to sell your Forth? Do the work. Take the money. Ignore the emotions. That's rational. > I don't think there is any money to be made in compiler writing. Aw, ... Is my life a waste? Wait. So, I'm correct. Hurray! You're still a whirlwind of contradictions. > The only way to make money is by selling boards. You're saying that licensing software doesn't make money anymore? Please don't tell that to Microsoft. Their stock might crash and then they would be bought by that goofball who runs Facebook. 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 | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-27 12:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mhl6nn$s93$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38620 |
on 26/04/2015 22:05:57, wrote: > In article <mhjcrg$d32$1@dont-email.me>, > Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> wrote: >>on 24/04/2015 22:03:04, "Alex McDonald" wrote: >>> I still believe it is not possible to build a functional ALIAS or >>> SYNONYM with only ANS words because of this. >>> >> >>When I think further about it, I'm wrong. It should be possible to build >>one Forth with another Forth; so yes, given enough code, you can write >>(or rewrite) your Forth and then write a working ALIAS or SYNONYM. What >>you would need to write and how much of it I don't know. >> >>To get round the S" and TO problem of ticking, write interpretation >>versions of S" and TO, and then: >> >>: ' ( "name" -- xt ) >> \ implement smart ' in terms of dumb ' and ['] >> ' CASE >> ['] S" OF ['] S"-int ENDOF >> ['] TO OF ['] TO-int ENDOF >> DUP >> ENDCASE ; >>: ['] ' POSTPONE LITERAL ; IMMEDIATE > > Can someone give a use case for ticking TO ? > >> >>Courtesy of Anton Ertl >>https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/dpans-html/comment-semantics.html. > > Groetjes Albert The general principle is one of what is meant by the tick STATE smart words, and in this case those that parse. TO and S" are poster children for this. Some Forth OOP systems have the same issue; especially those that use method: object syntax, where the method word parses the object name. For example, it is problematic ticking methods in Win32Forth since many are STATE smart and (by design) parse for object names.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-27 23:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c4c4249f-890d-4cbc-a129-fae8d86c8f0c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38620 |
On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 2:06:03 PM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote: > Can someone give a use case for ticking TO ? Okay, my SYNONYM SYNONYM-FAST and ALIAS work with TO also. All that is needed is to add this to my disambiguity words: : to postpone to ; immediate Now we can tick TO also (tested under VFX): get-current synonym my-to to ok 12345 value vvv ok vvv . 12345 ok 67890 my-to vvv ok vvv . 67890 ok : ttt locals| jjj | jjj . 13579 my-to jjj jjj . ; ok 24680 ttt 24680 13579 ok
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-28 08:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mhnbhl$kam$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38676 |
on 28/04/2015 07:31:26, wrote: > On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 2:06:03 PM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst > > wrote: >> Can someone give a use case for ticking TO ? > wrote: > > Okay, my SYNONYM SYNONYM-FAST and ALIAS work with TO also. All that is > needed is to add this to my disambiguity words: > >: to postpone to ; immediate > > Now we can tick TO also (tested under VFX): > > get-current synonym my-to to ok > 12345 value vvv ok > vvv . 12345 ok > 67890 my-to vvv ok > vvv . 67890 ok >: ttt locals| jjj | jjj . 13579 my-to jjj jjj . ; ok > 24680 ttt 24680 13579 ok > 6.2.2295 TO Note: An ambiguous condition exists if any of POSTPONE, [COMPILE], ’ or [’] are applied to TO. Try again. You're going to need to write a complete Forth in Forth I fear.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-28 10:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <86r3r4y890.fsf@vps34351.public.cloudvps.com> |
| In reply to | #38678 |
"Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> writes: >>: to postpone to ; immediate >> Now we can tick TO also > > 6.2.2295 TO Note: An ambiguous condition exists if any of POSTPONE, > [COMPILE], ’ or [’] are applied to TO. > > Try again. You're going to need to write a complete Forth in Forth I > fear. Abort, Retry, Fail? WORDLIST CONSTANT W GET-ORDER 1+ W SWAP SET-ORDER GET-CURRENT W SET-CURRENT : TO ALSO FORTH >IN @ 3 - >IN ! PREVIOUS ; IMMEDIATE SET-CURRENT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-28 12:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mhnq6v$7sb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38682 |
On 28/04/2015 09:20, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> writes:
>>> : to postpone to ; immediate
>>> Now we can tick TO also
>>
>> 6.2.2295 TO Note: An ambiguous condition exists if any of POSTPONE,
>> [COMPILE], ’ or [’] are applied to TO.
>>
>> Try again. You're going to need to write a complete Forth in Forth I
>> fear.
>
> Abort, Retry, Fail?
>
> WORDLIST CONSTANT W
> GET-ORDER 1+ W SWAP SET-ORDER
> GET-CURRENT W SET-CURRENT
> : TO ALSO FORTH >IN @ 3 - >IN ! PREVIOUS ; IMMEDIATE
> SET-CURRENT
>
Abort, Retry, Fail?
^^^^
synonym infinite-loop to
The PREVIOUS means that the new version of TO is executed again.
I think the above definition of TO needs to be something like (assumes 1
CHARS = 1)
: to ( x -- )
also forth
source >in @ 3 - /string drop ( -- caddr )
parse-name + over - ( -- caddr2 u2 )
evaluate previous ( -- )
; immediate
--
Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-28 14:04 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <86iocgxxvb.fsf@vps34351.public.cloudvps.com> |
| In reply to | #38686 |
Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> writes: > The PREVIOUS means that the new version of TO is executed again. Right, thanks for the correction! > I think the above definition of TO needs to be something like (assumes > 1 CHARS = 1) > > : to ( x -- ) > also forth > source >in @ 3 - /string drop ( -- caddr ) > parse-name + over - ( -- caddr2 u2 ) > evaluate previous ( -- ) > ; immediate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-28 14:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mho33i$9et$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38688 |
On 28/04/2015 13:04, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> writes:
>> The PREVIOUS means that the new version of TO is executed again.
>
> Right, thanks for the correction!
>
>> I think the above definition of TO needs to be something like (assumes
>> 1 CHARS = 1)
>>
>> : to ( x -- )
>> also forth
>> source >in @ 3 - /string drop ( -- caddr )
>> parse-name + over - ( -- caddr2 u2 )
>> evaluate previous ( -- )
>> ; immediate
But even that is unsatisfactory since you can't meaningfully ' or
postpone it. It probably needs GForth's EXECUTE-PARSING or Forth 2012
SUBSTITUTE e.g.
---------------
wordlist constant w
get-order 1+ w swap set-order
get-current w set-current
: to ( x -- )
also forth
parse-name s" name" replaces
s" to %name%" pad 40 substitute ( -- caddr u n )
1 <> abort" TO failed"
evaluate previous
;
set-current
------------------
This version of TO can be ticked and postponed
--
Gerry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-28 22:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mhovkl$sk7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #38690 |
on 28/04/2015 14:49:37, Gerry Jackson wrote:
> On 28/04/2015 13:04, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
>> Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> writes:
>>> The PREVIOUS means that the new version of TO is executed again.
>>
>> Right, thanks for the correction!
>>
>>> I think the above definition of TO needs to be something like (assumes
>>> 1 CHARS = 1)
>>>
>>> : to ( x -- )
>>> also forth
>>> source >in @ 3 - /string drop ( -- caddr )
>>> parse-name + over - ( -- caddr2 u2 )
>>> evaluate previous ( -- )
>>> ; immediate
>
> But even that is unsatisfactory since you can't meaningfully ' or
> postpone it. It probably needs GForth's EXECUTE-PARSING or Forth 2012
> SUBSTITUTE e.g.
> ---------------
> wordlist constant w
> get-order 1+ w swap set-order
> get-current w set-current
>
>: to ( x -- )
> also forth
> parse-name s" name" replaces
> s" to %name%" pad 40 substitute ( -- caddr u n )
> 1 <> abort" TO failed"
> evaluate previous
> ;
>
> set-current
> ------------------
>
> This version of TO can be ticked and postponed
>
>
>
I can't get this to work with locals, since {: X:} S" TO X" EVALUATE
results in TO being interpreted at run time and there's no local X in the
dictionary at run time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hughaguilar96@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-20 23:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2e188d5d-14d1-490c-a76c-d4aa50dccf2b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38416 |
On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 8:52:45 AM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 1:58:22 AM UTC-7, Doug Hoffman wrote: > > On 4/19/15 7:39 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > Anyway, I don't think that people with integrity will purposely put > > > pitfalls in the way of other people. > > > > Neither do I and that did not happen here. VFX Forth is an outstanding > > product. If you want to point out areas where it could be made even > > better then great. Do so. I would suggest starting with private emails > > directly to Stephen. > > > > -Doug > > VFX is doing what the ANS-Forth standard requires. In that thread, > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/oXXQAGDKP7w%5B26-50%5D > Anton Ertl explained it by quoting from the ANS-Forth document: > On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 1:58:22 AM UTC-7, Doug Hoffman wrote: > > On 4/19/15 7:39 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > > >BTW: Who was the "Forth-94 TC member" who interpreted this sentence, "When = > > >interpreting, ' xyz EXECUTE is equivalent to xyz." to mean that it is impos= > > >sible in ANS-Forth to obtain a working xt of an immediate word? This seems = > > >like a bit of a stretch to interpret this one sentence in such a way as to = > > >make meaningless the xt of every immediate word (why does FIND return an xt= > > > for an immediate word if it is meaningless, and why doesn't the documentat= > > >ion for FIND mention that it is returning an unusable xt?) > > > > The TC member was Loring Craymer. But looking at the old mails, the > > TC also pointed me to: > > > > |4.1.2 Ambiguous conditions > > |[...] > > |attempting to obtain the execution token, (e.g., with 6.1.0070 ', > > |6.1.1550 FIND, etc.) of a definition with undefined interpretation > > |semantics; > > > > And interpreting that to mean that a standard program cannot get the > > xt of a word without interpretation semantics is not at all a stretch. > > > > Concerning FIND, returning the not-found result when FINDing a word > > without interpretation semantcs in interpretation state would also be > > an option; that's what cmForth did, and supporting such systems was > > certainly the intent of the Forth-94 TC. > > > > I guess you would not be any happier if ' IF reported "undefined word" > > and if C" IF" FIND in interpretation state gave you the not-found > > result. > > The discussion belongs on comp.lang.forth, not in a private email to Stephen Pelc, because it is about ANS-Forth. > > This is clearly a pitfall that the ANS-Forth committee put in the way of common Forth programmers to prevent them from writing certain kinds of programs. There is ***NO POSITIVE BENEFIT*** to this! Stephen Pelc is supporting the ANS-Forth committee in going out of his way to enforce this restriction --- it would have been easier to just allow IF to have a working xt like any other word, rather than special-case it so that its xt aborts when executed. > > If the restriction is necessary for Forth compilation, then why was it possible for me to work around it? > > I was told in that thread that it is impossible to write SYNONYM in ANS-Forth because of this restriction --- but after I figured out a way to work around the restriction, I was able to write SYNONYM easily --- what was intended by the ANS-Forth committee to be impossible, I succeed in doing! :-D > > The way that I see it, Stephen Pelc wanted me to use his SYNONYM which is not ANS-Forth in order to catch me with vendor lock-in (and vendor lock-in is what the language standard is supposed to prevent). The whole point of this bizarre restriction that Anton Ertl explained above, was to prevent common Forth programmers such as myself from writing SYNONYM and other similar code. But I defeated Stephen Pelc and Anton Ertl and everybody else in the ANS-Forth cult by working around their restriction. I figured out what is going on here. ANS-Forth has words that either lack an xt, or have an xt that aborts when executed. The purpose of this is to prevent common Forth programmers from writing cross-compilers. The outer interpreter in a Forth system is using a version of FIND that returns valid xt values for ALL words --- it wouldn't be able to work otherwise --- but the version of FIND that is provided to the common programmers has been sabotaged so that it doesn't return a valid xt value for some of the words. The result is that the common Forth programmer is not able to write an outer interpreter of his own. So, who wants to write an outer interpreter? Cross-compiler writers! The ANS-Forth standard was sabotaged to prevent common programmers from writing cross-compilers. This is because Forth Inc. and MPE make most of their money selling cross-compilers. I have really caught the ANS-Forth committee red-handed --- they sabotaged the Forth community on purpose --- they do not deserve any respect ever again from the Forth community!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-17 13:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <08f86ee8-5510-4295-960d-bdfce6ff9caf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38224 |
> While not every system supports the Forth-2012 locals syntax {: ... :}
> out of the box yet, you can add this syntax yourself easily by
> downloading and unzipping
>
> http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x-code.zip
>
> and then including forth200x-code/extensions/parse-name.fs and
> forth200x-code/extensions/locals.fs.
It's only possible to load the code if the system have the word (local), which might not be implemented. Not in SP-Forth any way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-18 00:31 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1vyp5olzuj3jk$.qfj3fb1vcspa$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #38297 |
Op Fri, 17 Apr 2015 13:44:58 -0700 (PDT) schreef lehs:
>> While not every system supports the Forth-2012 locals syntax {: ... :}
>> out of the box yet, you can add this syntax yourself easily by
>> downloading and unzipping
>>
>> http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x-code.zip
>>
>> and then including forth200x-code/extensions/parse-name.fs and
>> forth200x-code/extensions/locals.fs.
>
> It's only possible to load the code if the system have the word (local), which might not be implemented. Not in SP-Forth any way.
An implementation that has the Locals word set should have the two words of
the word set: (LOCAL) and an extension of TO.
--
Coos
CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications
http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-18 14:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2015Apr18.162254@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #38297 |
lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> writes:
>> While not every system supports the Forth-2012 locals syntax {: ... :}
>> out of the box yet, you can add this syntax yourself easily by
>> downloading and unzipping
>>
>> http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x-code.zip
>>
>> and then including forth200x-code/extensions/parse-name.fs and
>> forth200x-code/extensions/locals.fs.
>
>It's only possible to load the code if the system have the word (local), which might not be implemented. Not in SP-Forth any way.
Yes, the locals wordset is optional. You can ask the maintainers of
the Forth system whether they are going to implement it (without user
demand they have little reason to do it), or you use a Forth system
that has it already; or maybe even "{:".
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2014: http://www.euroforth.org/ef14/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web