Re: Starting Forth 5.

From	rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Starting Forth 5.
Date	2013-09-25 16:35 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<l1vhf7$c2p$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<l1qcit$998$1@dont-email.me> <524177ff$0$304$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <l1td0d$4i6$1@dont-email.me> <5242a9bb$0$26866$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl>

Show all headers | View raw

On 9/25/2013 5:15 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article<l1td0d$4i6$1@dont-email.me>, rickman<gnuarm@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 9/24/2013 7:31 AM, Doug Hoffman wrote:
>>> On 9/23/13 5:41 PM, WJ wrote:
>>>>
>>>> : DOUBLED
>>>> 6 1000 21 1 DO CR ." YEAR " I 2 U.R
>>>> 2DUP R% + DUP ." BALANCE " .
>>>> DUP 2000>  IF CR CR ." more than doubled in "
>>>> I . ." years " LEAVE
>>>> THEN
>>>> LOOP 2DROP ;
>>>
>>>> DOUBLED
>>>> YEAR 1 BALANCE 1060
>>>> YEAR 2 BALANCE 1124
>>>> YEAR 3 BALANCE 1191
>>>> YEAR 4 BALANCE 1262
>>>> YEAR 5 BALANCE 1338
>>>> YEAR 6 BALANCE 1418
>>>> YEAR 7 BALANCE 1503
>>>> YEAR 8 BALANCE 1593
>>>> YEAR 9 BALANCE 1609
>>>> YEAR 10 BALANCE 1790
>>>> YEAR 11 BALANCE 1897
>>>> YEAR 12 BALANCE 2011
>>>> more than doubled in 12 years ok
>>>
>>>> ... the results are inaccurate, since integers are
>>>> used instead of floating point.
>>>
>>> They are precisely accurate in terms of integers with "precision as
>>> displayed", which a programmer should understand. You miss the purpose
>>> of the example, which is to illustrate the use of LEAVE.
>>>
>>>> And there is a typo for year 9; the amount shoud be
>>>> 1689.
>>>
>>> Which has nothing to do with programming. It is just a
>>> transcription-to-website error (the paper book has the correct number).
>>> By the way, you committed a typo just now (shoud).
>>>
>>>> If you want it done correctly, a modern high-level
>>>> language like Ruby must be used.
>>>
>>> The last comparison I made showed your Ruby code to be about 1000 times
>>> slower than the Forth code (also your Ruby code was bugged). You keep
>>> missing these important and obvious points. Why?
>>>
>>> You may want to understand your apparently uncontrollable fascination
>>> with and time spent on a topic that you say you dislike so much. There
>>> are professionals that can help you.
>>>
>>> -Doug
>>
>> There are a great many people in this group who seem to compulsively
>> respond to this guy in spite of the fact that he continues to post the
>> same sort of denigration of Forth over an over again.  No matter how
>> many people respond to him, he continues to not respond to any of the
>> points they raise and post more of the same in reply.
>>
>> Why do people keep responding to him?  Why do I bother to point out any
>> of this?
>
> Some of us see it as a challenge to show that Forth is up to the
> programming exercises that WJ poses. We run that show for our own public,
> not for miss/mister/misses WJ.

We call that preaching to the choir.  The result is the same.  The troll 
is reinforced and continues to troll... in this case I would say it even 
increases the amount he trolls.

-- 

Rick

Thread

Starting Forth 5. "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2013-09-23 21:41 +0000
  Re: Starting Forth 5. Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2013-09-24 07:31 -0400
    Re: Starting Forth 5. mhx@iae.nl - 2013-09-24 10:29 -0700
    Re: Starting Forth 5. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-24 21:07 -0400
      Re: Starting Forth 5. mhx@iae.nl - 2013-09-24 21:33 -0700
        Re: Starting Forth 5. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-09-25 09:20 +0000
      Re: Starting Forth 5. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@nohavenotit.com> - 2013-09-25 02:41 -0400
      Re: Starting Forth 5. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-09-25 09:15 +0000
        Re: Starting Forth 5. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-25 16:35 -0400
  Re: Starting Forth 5. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2013-09-24 18:21 +0000
    Re: Starting Forth 5. "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-09-24 19:43 +0100

csiph-web