00:00:00 --- log: started forth/01.01.17 02:29:39 --- join: I440r (mark4@purplecoder.com) joined #forth 02:47:32 --- quit: I440r (Reality Strikes Again!) 03:38:33 --- join: I440r (mark4@purplecoder.com) joined #forth 03:39:03 erm 03:39:04 brb 03:39:09 --- part: I440r left #forth 03:39:32 --- join: I440r (mark4@purplecoder.com) joined #forth 03:39:32 --- mode: ChanServ set mode: +o I440r 03:39:34 --- mode: I440r set mode: +o aaronl 03:39:40 aaronl: didnt i add u here yet ? 08:11:06 --- join: Fare (fare@ppp101-net1-idf2-bas1.isdnet.net) joined #forth 12:10:24 --- quit: aaronl (Ping timeout for aaronl[vitelus.com]) 12:15:36 --- join: edrx (edrx@200.240.18.64) joined #forth 13:16:33 --- part: edrx left #forth 15:07:30 --- join: aaronl (aaronl@vitelus.com) joined #forth 15:30:38 --- join: edrx (edrx@200.240.18.64) joined #forth 15:47:15 --- quit: aaronl (Read error to aaronl[vitelus.com]: Connection reset by peer) 15:47:16 --- join: aaronl (aaronl@vitelus.com) joined #forth 15:48:19 aaronl: hi - have you tried some version of colorforth? 15:52:14 no 15:53:09 there's one that runs on DOS and that can be run in dosemu, I went bouncing when I saw that 15:53:33 http://angg.twu.net/e/fortho.e.html#c4th 16:03:48 --- part: edrx left #forth 16:09:17 --- join: Fare_ (fare@ppp101-net1-idf2-bas1.isdnet.net) joined #forth 16:23:20 --- quit: Fare_ (Connection reset by pear) 16:37:27 --- quit: Fare (Ping timeout for Fare[ppp101-net1-idf2-bas1.isdnet.net]) 17:00:20 --- join: Fare (fare@ppp36-net1-idf2-bas1.isdnet.net) joined #forth 17:18:45 --- join: tcn (tcn@207.198.30.66) joined #forth 17:19:35 T C N ! 17:19:55 fare.. what be up? 17:20:11 socialist lies 17:20:17 lots of them, in France. 17:20:33 prices are up, too 17:20:46 hehe.. like this tax on blank media? 17:21:29 %$}%*µ!?&#~ ! 17:22:12 on the other hand, France Telecom internetworking is down 17:23:16 what are they gonna do, distribute the tax revenues to every copyright holder regardless of, uh, 'market share'? 17:25:00 distribute them to monopolistic corporations that pretend to represent the authors 17:25:34 every economic dream of the fascists come true 17:25:40 thanks to the socialist 17:25:45 national socialists 17:26:14 hehe 17:27:48 i think i'm becoming a luddite 17:28:06 luddite? how so? 17:29:05 not technology in itself, but big industry 17:29:38 which isn't industrious in any way :) 17:30:18 eh, big industry == government, these days 17:31:47 govt isn't AS bad, not in the US at least 17:32:53 the govt & taxpayers are getting fucked over by industry 17:34:45 ahh but they all work the same... "put the morons in charge" 17:38:08 Interesting discussion there, with Stallman.. 17:51:51 hum 17:52:03 wb :) 18:09:11 --- join: Fare_ (fare@ppp36-net1-idf2-bas1.isdnet.net) joined #forth 18:13:23 Fare: what's the last thing you saw? 18:18:28 didn't see much 18:25:11 hum 18:25:11 wb :) 18:25:44 eh, big industry == government, these days 18:25:44 govt isn't AS bad, not in the US at least 18:25:44 the govt & taxpayers are getting fucked over by industry 18:25:44 ahh but they all work the same... "put the morons 18:26:00 Interesting discussion there, with Stallman.. 18:29:16 thanks 18:29:45 well, actually government == lobbies 18:29:55 big industry is but part of the lobbies 18:30:03 oh, I said.. "put the morons in charge" 18:30:05 there are also strong labor unions 18:30:15 rather put the crooks in charge. 18:30:21 hehe 18:30:30 that too 18:32:46 tcn!!! 18:32:47 dood 18:32:51 do me a faver 18:32:57 btw, how's retro? 18:33:06 email me at mark4@purplecoder.com so i have a return address 18:33:14 i wanna start working on isforth again with u 18:33:25 if ur up for it heh 18:33:32 --- mode: I440r set mode: +o aaronl 18:33:34 --- mode: I440r set mode: +o Fare 18:33:41 --- mode: I440r set mode: +o Fare_ 18:33:46 --- mode: I440r set mode: +o tcn 18:34:18 oh, allright 18:35:05 cool! 18:36:00 well, i just read Starting Forth 18:36:27 have you seen the ocaml virtual machine? 18:36:38 it's almost forth 18:37:00 so is the VB VM 18:37:29 JUST read it ??? 18:37:34 hehe its phunnie eh ? 18:38:00 yeah, I read THinking Forth first 18:38:23 but I learned a lot more from SF 18:38:58 especially "Under The Hood" 18:38:59 sf is a brilliant book 18:39:12 its old shit but still the best tutorial that ever there was for forth 18:39:38 I like these pre-ANS words 18:39:44 me 2 18:39:51 ans words are fucked up 18:39:58 i dont even like the term CELL 18:40:01 cell+ and cell* 18:40:03 bullshit 18:40:05 like FLUSH instead of SAVE-BUFFERS 18:40:06 thats 2* and 2+ 18:40:10 hehe 18:40:25 yes, but the ocaml vm is used in a language that truly rocks, and it is quite efficient 18:41:31 well at least ocaml doesn't force all them ()'s on you 18:42:15 well, the VM does have some idiosynchrasies due to supporting currying as an efficient way to achieve multiargument functions 18:42:15 are CHARS and CHAR+ also from ANS? 18:43:03 Fare: i'm not leaving forth for ocaml :) 18:45:39 of course you're not 18:45:53 have you seen POP-11 ? 18:46:04 it's exactly FORTH, except with a GC. 18:46:21 and a different syntax -- was invented at the same moment by someone else 18:46:59 it also has an infix syntax, and the VM supports pop, prolog, commonlisp, ml, and maybe more. 18:47:32 hmm 18:48:04 can a POP function return multiple values? 18:48:53 yea thats why i like forth... no limits on parameters, no limits on returned values 18:48:54 it sure can 18:49:17 so can cl and prolog 18:49:47 (in ml, you return tuples, but I suppose the compilers optimize it on stack when available). 18:49:50 so basically, POP is a complicated variant of FORTH 18:49:52 (or in registers) 18:50:00 no. It's not complicated. 18:50:22 It's rather simple, but with an implicit GC, lots of standardized functions, etc. 18:50:47 thats bloat 18:50:53 depends what for 18:51:04 for symbolic computation, it's just NEEDED 18:51:48 argh why complicate simplicity 18:52:28 well, I should check it out.. might come in handy to have a "robust" language that resembles forth 18:53:07 it would beat Java :) 18:53:56 anyway.. back to the topic, isforth 18:56:47 hmm 18:58:44 you know how intel uses 8=byte, 16=word, 32=dword, 64=qword... are there any generic words for these? like 8=octet.. 18:59:03 I440r: tell me how to manipulate data structures more easily 19:00:45 int8, int16, int32, int64, int128 19:00:46 I guess we could have words like B@ W@ D@ Q@ 19:02:01 well u woudld use a creating word to create them 19:02:08 they would be does> words maybe 19:02:30 except D conflicts with all the D... words, and 2 conflicts with the 2.. words 19:02:45 u could easilly create a self sorting binary heap in forth 19:04:03 --- quit: Fare_ (Connection reset by pear) 19:05:02 you think it's too much to expect code to run on both 16- and 32-bit forths? 19:05:14 yes 19:05:16 hehe 19:05:30 that's the reason for all them CELL words 19:05:37 i know 19:05:40 i STILL hate them 19:07:01 I guess you could always use CELL if you must, but normally write non-portable code 19:08:00 it's just that it wouldn't be so bad if it was C+ C* etc.. 19:08:09 i hate portable code 19:08:22 i thinc portability is an over rated idea 19:08:30 i write my code to be VERY specific 19:08:42 specific to the task at hand and specific to the processor its written for 19:08:43 yeah 19:08:52 no fscking jack of all trade code for me :P 19:09:21 non-portable code is simpler and therefore easier to port 19:11:27 exactly 19:11:32 well 19:11:38 that DOES depend on who writ it hehe 19:11:55 i had a long arguement in #debian about how asm is simpler to read than c 19:12:12 give me an executable and ill convert it to a source file 19:12:28 hehe, yeah, if you know the cpu 19:12:32 give me the c sources to some program and it takes me weeks to get them sorted out in my head 19:12:34 ern no 19:12:38 on any cpu 19:12:48 even one ive never used before 19:12:53 just give me a disassembler 19:13:06 ill figure out the processor on the fly 19:14:41 c is very complex... asm is very simple 19:14:52 they were saying asm is no good for LARGE projects tho heh 19:14:53 duh 19:15:02 ok, so I got ur mail.. 19:15:39 heh, I can't type 'u', it becomes 'you' 19:15:54 grr 19:16:28 --- quit: Fare (3053) 19:17:19 hehe u can get rid of that 19:17:26 ur using xchat rite ? 19:18:06 yeah 19:18:07 look in menu item settings --> replace 19:18:22 hehe 19:18:33 ms word lamenell 19:18:34 ss 19:18:47 that always used to piss me off because i had a bot called U on my irc server way back 19:18:57 hehe 19:18:57 hahahahaha 19:19:02 /msg u blayh blah always became /msg you blah blahg blah 19:19:45 and someone made a bot called you that would tell u to do the opposite 19:20:17 hehe 19:21:03 now, as for coding style, I can follow your example... 19:21:31 k 19:21:40 as long as it stays close to what i was doing heh 19:22:33 I think i'll just straighten out the vocab linking crap, delete some extraneous junk, add my syscall stuff.. 19:22:35 i think i have a problem with letting go of control tho hehe 19:22:44 yea 19:22:48 hehe.. me too. 19:22:50 we need to plan what should be done 19:23:17 if i add u as a developer ill have to share control of the project with you... 19:23:28 you SAHOULD be able to dictate polacy as mych as i do 19:23:35 my first action w/ isforth was to restart from scratch :) 19:23:54 hehehe 19:23:57 ur sacked :P 19:24:08 then I realized that's too much worj 19:24:11 specially if u plan to do it in c :P 19:24:15 hehe 19:24:17 haha 19:24:49 ahh crap, still gettin used to the dvorak layout 19:25:00 define "straightening out the vocab" 19:25:04 u use that? 19:25:22 nope 19:25:29 qerty rox :P 19:26:11 i type bad ennuff with just that heheh 19:26:14 hehe 19:26:17 what words would u delete 19:27:07 what u say we ditch the forth/compiler vocab thing for now.. nasm can't handle it 19:27:22 ? 19:27:24 oh 19:27:29 yea i know what u mean 19:27:32 well yea 19:27:39 we can have all words in the same vocab 19:27:43 all on ONE chain 19:27:56 we cah put in a temporary function to break the chains on boot :) 19:28:02 heh 19:28:03 it would know how etc 19:28:20 wouldnt need complex macros 19:28:26 it's slow but we have k6-350's 19:28:26 actually i was of half a mind to do that ahnyway 19:28:31 those macros are a bitch 19:28:51 well the oplan is for isforht to compile itself eventually 19:28:51 hehe .. they'd never work 19:29:05 forht is much better at handling vocabs than nasm is :P 19:29:15 once isforht can compile itself we wont need nasm at all 19:29:34 this is still the project bootstrap phase 19:29:56 it wont bee till isforht is truely compiling itself that we REALY start the project 19:30:30 all we really need are INTERPRET [ ] : ; and the words they use 19:30:42 quit 19:30:53 erm no 19:31:02 create/does> 19:31:05 the kernel needs alot of support words that he kernel itself doesnt use 19:31:25 but yes... there is alot of stuff in there that should realy be extentions 19:31:35 we may only need about 30 words 19:31:51 and an assembler 19:32:03 i STILl want 99% of the "KERNEL" to be done in assembler 19:32:04 add that later 19:32:18 and i absolutely refuse to use anyone elses assemblers, they are shit or cost :P 19:32:23 ok 19:32:27 well 19:32:39 my assembler sucks :) 19:32:43 let me see if i understand what ur saying... 19:33:11 get rid of things like + / * swap dup etc from the kernel 19:33:38 write the BASICinner interpreter with any primatives that IT needs 19:33:49 then put all the rest of the kernel into extentions ? 19:33:56 we could have 19:33:57 kernel 19:34:04 kernel + core extentions 19:34:13 kernel + core extentions + extentions 19:34:27 keep kernel itself to an absolute minimum 19:34:44 something like that.. compile when u run isforth 19:34:49 kernel could meta compile the extentions into itself 19:34:51 or SAVE" 19:35:06 then u can meta compile any other extentions taht you want 19:35:15 like the editor/debugger etc 19:35:32 this would only work if we could have the assembler as a shared library 19:35:46 WHAT? 19:36:00 the kernel itself would NOT have the assembler built into it 19:36:18 so you wouldnt be able to meta compile the core primatives onto the kernel itself 19:36:20 BUT 19:36:30 but it could compile the assembler 19:36:33 if the kernel were able to tap into a pre compiled assembler 19:36:39 no 19:36:49 because the assembler would be guaranteed to need the core primatives 19:36:55 egg/chicken 19:37:29 well put them in the kernel.. don't trim TOO much 19:38:27 - + DUP SWAP etc, those can be in the kernel.. and u already wrote em 19:38:31 cool :) 19:38:33 im 37 :) 19:38:37 argh wrong window 19:38:46 no 19:38:52 we could trim ALOT 19:38:56 but not yet :) 19:39:04 heh 19:39:12 what we do is we make a humongous kernel with every single word we would ever wont in it 19:39:22 we use that to create a loadable libaray assmbler 19:39:30 it's hard to believe that I440r is almost as old as my dad 19:39:36 then we make a NEW kernel that is absolutely minimal 19:39:37 but then again, both do program in assembly... 19:39:42 NOTHING in it that IT doesnt use itself 19:39:46 not even the assembler 19:40:25 so 19:40:32 we have a realy realy relay SIMPLE kernel 19:40:41 taht has the ability to link a shared lib 19:40:50 do u REALLY want to write 500 words like this: dd DUP,PLUS,STORE 19:41:04 hehe no 19:41:20 we dont need to go to those extreems... we can draw a line :P 19:41:39 but we make a full blown entity kernel with all extentions SOMEHOW 19:41:49 and use that to build the minimal kernel 19:41:51 then the kernel needs just the words needed to compile the standard words 19:41:56 and the shared lib assembler 19:42:14 then we cah use the minimal kernel to compile the core extentions onto itself using the shared lib assembler 19:42:18 hehe yer gettin ahead of me 19:42:24 i know 19:42:29 im always 1 step ahead :P 19:43:05 so the minimal kernel links the assembler, assembles the core extentions onto itself 19:43:08 and saves itself out 19:43:17 call that kernel+ 19:43:36 then we load kernel+ and have it extend itself with what ever... (the application code) or the development code 19:44:01 ok 19:44:02 so 19:44:18 1) nasm kernel 2) compile extensions at boot, in FORTH 3) metacompile 19:44:19 in order to do this we need a badly coded all in one blob forth compiler 19:44:25 which is what were working on now 19:44:29 question 19:44:35 waht words are need in blobbykernel 19:45:00 whatever the assembler/metacompiler need 19:45:21 u see... ur working th ewrong way round to me 19:45:25 ur doing top down 19:45:30 i always code bottom up heh 19:46:08 i'm *planning* top down 19:46:21 :) 19:46:35 coding from syscalls on up 19:48:03 maybe i should just DO it 19:48:20 hehe wait 19:48:22 im adding u 19:49:18 well don't expect anything for a week or so.. i'm going to a fiddle workshop 19:49:33 fiddle workshop ? 19:50:01 i cant find where to add developers hehe 19:50:03 argh :P 19:50:06 heh 19:50:28 then I gotta figure out sourceforge.. 19:50:35 yea :P 19:50:38 ill find it... 19:51:44 I could send you my updates.. 19:51:55 yea 19:52:05 i could do what linus does 19:52:13 nothing gets into the kernel till HE has vetted it hehe 19:52:14 or 19:52:18 thats how he used to do it 19:52:24 i dunno about now tho 19:52:38 hehe.. before linux sucked 19:53:07 :P 19:53:34 hmm.. I guess all this ?>mark stuff can go 19:53:37 are you registered on sf ? 19:53:44 it can 19:53:49 i already commented it out didnt i ? 19:54:13 aww yeah :) 19:54:26 >mark resolve and took me ages to figure those out heh 19:54:59 maybe DO..*LOOP can go, too.. use FOR..NEXT 19:55:24 i dislike for and next 19:55:34 but do and loop are more compex 19:55:52 for and next are not good words tho because "next" is already defined as something completely different 19:55:59 if we use that construct i would suggest a name change 19:56:08 hehe.. all the loop/branch words are so different in DTC, after STC.. 19:56:20 :) 19:56:49 btw 19:57:08 i think the compiling words (creating words) of the kernel can go in a shared lib too 19:57:17 that would be easier than my transient vocab idea 19:57:33 but the kernel would HAVE to be able to load a shared libarry 19:57:46 easier said than done 19:58:02 i know 19:58:06 but i want it now :P 19:58:14 i say. compile extensions at boot time 19:58:35 hmmm 19:58:36 no 19:58:48 ill tel u whay 19:58:53 extentions are optional things 19:59:10 how would you control what got extended when u ran 19:59:13 erm 19:59:14 wait 19:59:18 i goet how!!!! 19:59:27 you make the source file ur going to extend WOTH 19:59:29 a load file 19:59:31 make it +x 19:59:35 and give it a shebang! 19:59:45 ? 19:59:47 #!/usr/bin/isforth 19:59:53 ahha 19:59:56 sounds good 19:59:57 fload some_extention 19:59:59 fload some_extention 19:59:59 fload some_extention 20:00:00 fload some_extention 20:00:00 fload some_extention 20:00:09 are you actually working on isofrth agaaing? 20:00:15 when it finishes extending ur at the forth prompt! 20:00:25 that gets the users into the habit of not running forth itself 20:00:27 yay! 20:00:34 but treating all the source files as executable scripts :) 20:00:35 ok 20:00:38 ok 20:00:42 THAT works for me :) 20:00:51 what's FLOAD btw? 20:01:00 its an fpc thing 20:01:09 it tells forth to load taht source file and compile it 20:01:15 not just load it for edit 20:01:18 ok good 20:01:39 it basically makes the file the standard input stream till u hit eof 20:01:50 forht treats it as if u were typing it 20:01:55 but its coming from a file 20:02:26 by the way. im not against scrapping isforth as it now stands 20:02:36 like USE in ans 20:02:42 erm 20:02:44 i dont know 20:02:48 never learned ans 20:02:56 but "use" sounds like a fucked up word name to me 20:03:00 er, not ans... gforth 20:03:01 ur nto fucking USING that source 20:03:03 ur loading it 20:03:04 oh 20:03:08 gforth sucks big dime 20:03:12 duh 20:03:37 i would call it parse myself 20:03:38 and they change the name of it in each version 20:03:45 parse somefile 20:04:05 but parse is spoken for hehe 20:04:07 ok.. that's good 20:04:11 parse< ??? 20:04:13 parse from ? 20:04:24 parse< blah.forth 20:05:36 --- join: adu (andrew@adsl-63-201-90-7.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net) joined #forth 20:05:43 helooooooooooo 20:05:50 * adu echos 20:05:52 hi! 20:05:57 --- mode: I440r set mode: +o adu 20:06:00 * adu hears echo 20:06:09