Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle)

From	Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle)
Date	2016-12-03 01:58 -0500
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<20161203015814.7443a2d2@_> (permalink)
References	(14 earlier) <o1ga5a$1pa0$1@gioia.aioe.org> <42f2d0ba-a1bc-41b6-bc35-50a065bf0f9d@googlegroups.com> <o1ivr7$1su0$1@gioia.aioe.org> <20161129004209.27f63172@_> <o1ro66$1ugl$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 23:05:54 +1100
"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> wrote:

> Rod Pemberton wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 15:22:40 +1100
> > "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:  

> > > > It would make more sense to compare Forth to C than to assembler
> > > > --- Forth and C have similar uses --- of course, C has been
> > > > described as a portable assembly-language, and for a long time I
> > > > thought of Forth as being an over-grown macro-assembler, so
> > > > comparing both of them to assembler is reasonable.  
> > >
> > > Interesting C being described that way.  It's low level in a sense
> > > but users are still at the mercy of compiler, presupplied
> > > libraries and standards.  Forth is one of the few languages
> > > that's truly 'grass roots' - where users could create from ground
> > > up.  No reliance on anybody or thing.  Anyone that's used MASM
> > > has probably discovered there are things which can't be done,
> > > except perhaps awkwardly.  So Forth gets a tick over asm :)
> > >  
> >
> > "... where users could create from [the] ground up."
> >
> > I'd argue that statement describes the failing of Forth, not it's
> > merit.  That's part of the reason why Forth is called a "write-once"
> > language.  The others being that it's simple syntax can be
> > exceptionally cryptic, the code can be untraceable or difficult to
> > understand, and Forth requires the user to juggle stack items.
> > Without a large, standardized, and ubiquitous set of functionality,
> > every Forth application has to develop it's own solution to the
> > same basic programming problems and situations.  This requires
> > extra work, time or man-hours, on the part of the programmer, and
> > interferes with portability, as the resulting code is
> > non-standard.  The code is unique to that application, when every
> > application could've used the same functionality.  It also means
> > that any bad solutions or poor designs will be passed along forever
> > with that application.  It also means that numerous programs will
> > most assuredly have bad, buggy, or limited implementations of
> > functionality which is commonly used.  A programmer needs to have a
> > certain set of standard tools or components which are widely
> > available and easy to use.
> >
> 
> Elsewhere you mention x86 assembly.  You appear to acknowledge the
> skill of asm programmers who work in environments largely devoid of
> standards and libraries.  Yet when Forth programmers do the same,
> it's seen as a "failing" of the language?
> 

It's a general failing of assembly too.  There are various assembly
libraries, but they don't generally come with the assembler.  The
failing is that you have to do much more work to do if coding in
assembly, when you aren't using a library.  If you are using an
assembly library, you have to learn the intricacies of a non-standard,
non-portable library.  Assembly can be harder to test too, as you have
to code your own print routines and other code pieces to help you debug
it.  Of course, the assembly code isn't portable like a high-level
language.  C and Forth are the two most ubiquitous languages, but one
is still quite popular and the other almost dead.  One has libraries
and structured syntax, and one doesn't.

It can be a failing of C too, if you don't fully use the C libraries, or
if you restrict usage of C to C itself and just a portion of the C
library, as some do.  E.g., if you want the C code to compile with a
less-developed, more primitive, or simpler C compiler, you don't want to
make heavy use of the C libraries.  You might restrict C library usage
to just <stdio.h>.  The libraries for the less-developed C compiler
won't be as developed or, will have bugs.  A number of well known C
compilers have had various long-term non-compliance issues with the C
standards too.

Assembly is generally harder to work with, less forgiving, usually
doesn't come with a code optimizer, and requires register juggling.
This is much like Forth needing stack juggling.  If the assembler
doesn't have a good preprocessor, then you won't be able to use named
variables in the assembly code either.  This is a huge drawback.  So,
the best way to use assembly, IMO, is to extend or enhance or
complement a high-level language.  I.e., I don't recommend using
assembly, unless it's for something small or trivial or something which
simply can't be easily done in a high-level language without it, e.g.,
special file format, interfacing with the operating system, special
processor instructions, high-speed math or graphics routine, etc.

If you look at all the publicly available C code which has been produced
over the decades, much of it is still available and many projects are
still used or recycled.  You can't say that about the huge quantity of
MS-DOS programs which were released with assembly code.  The vast
majority of these programs are dead.  When x86 PCs migrated from 16-bit
to 32-bit, they couldn't be recompiled easily 32-bit.  C code could.  C
code didn't need a rewrite.

Rod Pemberton

Thread

Yet another draw of rectangle humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-11-19 13:34 -0800
  Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2016-11-20 00:53 +0000
  Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-20 14:46 +1100
    Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-19 20:01 -0800
      Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-20 20:10 +1100
      Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-20 01:18 -0800
        Re: Yet another draw of rectangle humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 01:36 -0800
          Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-20 02:16 -0800
            Re: Yet another draw of rectangle humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 02:36 -0800
            Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2016-11-20 07:48 -0500
              Re: Yet another draw of rectangle rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 23:36 -0500
    Re: Yet another draw of rectangle humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 02:03 -0800
      Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-20 21:49 +1100
        Re: Yet another draw of rectangle humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 03:33 -0800
          Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-20 08:52 -0800
          Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-11-20 12:05 -0600
          Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-21 10:43 +1100
            Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-20 16:25 -0800
              Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-21 15:20 +1100
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-22 00:02 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 01:00 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-22 01:13 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2016-11-22 20:54 +0000
                Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-27 13:32 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-26 18:52 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-28 15:00 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-27 18:32 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-27 20:44 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-29 15:22 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2016-11-29 00:42 -0500
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-28 22:20 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-29 17:18 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2016-11-29 23:15 -0500
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-11-30 07:08 +0200
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-29 21:51 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-11-30 12:09 +0200
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-30 09:43 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-11-30 17:36 -0600
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-30 14:31 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 07:02 +0200
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-12-01 08:58 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-01 16:44 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-05 21:28 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-05 07:41 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-06 18:13 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-12-05 21:36 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-06 00:05 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-08 10:09 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-07 15:27 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-08 04:22 -0600
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-08 17:05 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 01:47 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-09 04:01 -0600
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-09 06:49 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-10 10:15 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) josv@planet.nl - 2017-04-12 04:47 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-12-07 14:34 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-07 18:39 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-10 09:38 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-09 16:25 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-06 00:14 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-12-06 12:01 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-06 10:21 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-09 16:27 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2017-04-08 21:05 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-08 18:57 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 05:28 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-09 06:45 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2017-04-10 16:54 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-10 17:21 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2017-04-11 08:03 +0100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-04-11 07:50 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2017-04-11 11:43 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 10:16 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-04-11 10:21 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 10:48 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-11 23:58 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:07 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 00:29 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-12 00:55 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 04:07 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-12 13:29 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:51 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 03:50 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2017-04-12 12:55 +0200
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 04:17 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-12 06:03 -0500
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 04:30 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-04-12 08:44 -0500
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 13:01 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-12 13:33 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-12 12:59 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 17:05 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 10:27 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:02 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 20:10 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:16 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-05 12:01 -0600
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-05 10:39 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-05 18:53 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-05 11:33 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-12-05 22:22 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-06 04:29 -0600
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-06 11:32 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-07 19:06 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-06 04:27 -0600
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-06 10:24 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) john <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-30 13:41 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-11-30 15:15 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) john <anon@example.com> - 2016-12-01 09:54 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-01 04:42 -0600
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 13:09 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 13:14 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-12 08:32 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 12:42 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-12 10:36 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:41 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2017-04-12 13:25 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-04-12 14:13 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 17:45 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 05:53 -0700
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:34 -0400
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) john <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-29 11:48 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-11-29 14:24 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) john <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-29 21:27 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-29 18:15 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-11-30 10:03 +0000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-12-01 16:14 -0800
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-29 12:22 -1000
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-29 14:31 +0100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-02 23:05 +1100
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2016-12-03 01:58 -0500
                Re: Yet another language ( was Yet another draw of rectangle) "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-12-03 22:00 +1100
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-23 10:11 +1100
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-23 00:01 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-23 13:49 +0100
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-11-23 10:51 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-24 09:26 -1000
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-23 12:28 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-24 16:54 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-25 02:20 -0500
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-25 10:39 +0100
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-11-22 04:17 -0600
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-22 10:38 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-11-23 13:05 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-29 15:23 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-11-24 07:46 +0200
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-23 21:59 -0800
                Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-11-24 08:12 +0200
      Re: Yet another draw of rectangle rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-23 22:22 -0500
        Re: Yet another draw of rectangle humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-11-23 21:14 -0800
          Re: Yet another draw of rectangle rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-24 01:06 -0500
          Re: Yet another draw of rectangle "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-25 11:56 +1100
  Re: Yet another draw of rectangle hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-19 23:14 -0800
    Re: Yet another draw of rectangle hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-24 18:11 -0800
      Re: Yet another draw of rectangle luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-24 18:58 -0800
        Re: Yet another draw of rectangle luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2016-11-24 20:01 -0800
  Re: Yet another draw of rectangle Ilya Tarasov <ilya74.tarasov@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 14:08 -0800
  Re: Yet another draw of rectangle lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 06:41 -0700

csiph-web