00:00:00 --- log: started forth/02.05.25 01:49:40 --- join: davidw (~davidw@adsl-ull-106-108.42-151.net24.it) joined #forth 02:57:47 --- quit: CrowKiller ("User pushed the X - because it's Xtra, baby") 04:05:10 --- join: rob_ert (~robert@h237n2fls31o965.telia.com) joined #forth 04:37:59 * davidw wonders if RMS insists on eating only at places where they give him the recipes 04:39:25 :) 04:39:33 * rob_ert tells RMS how to cook rice. 04:47:09 :) 04:48:34 Hey 1tom. 04:48:44 @ ur service 04:48:52 sir 04:52:53 so 04:53:02 what should I *do* with this ficl/os 04:53:17 I need a cool demonstration of what could be done with it 04:55:19 maybe I should make a web page for it 04:55:24 damn, I have so much stuff I could do 04:55:25 fuck 04:55:37 then there is the stuff I need to do:-/ 04:56:22 but I'll probably not do any of it and just pass the afternoon with my girlfriend 04:56:23 davidw: is there any due date 4 this demo? 04:56:38 onetom: no, because it's purely a for-fun project that I'm doing 04:56:38 :) just like me 04:56:57 what is the url 4 ficl? 04:57:04 ficl.sourceforge.net 04:57:13 and what did u mean by oS? 04:57:22 is it a standalone sys? 04:58:26 it runs on ecos 04:58:37 but that's a very minimalistic OS 04:58:46 iirc its aum's project -- or @ least he mentioned it 4 me 04:58:55 hrm? 04:59:03 who is aum? 04:59:46 dont really know him.. 05:00:00 but "accidentaly" he has logged in once here 05:00:06 what is he doing? 05:00:16 and ive asked him about a preemtive multitask 4th 05:00:23 and he helped me 05:00:39 cant recall 05:00:48 we should search the logs :) 05:00:59 ficl is just a simple C forth 05:01:03 ecos is a real time OS 05:01:10 iknow 05:01:11 I didn't do much, just combined them 05:01:22 tho, ficl is far from simple :) 05:01:43 ive studied ecos a very lil bit some nites ago 05:01:50 so i have questions 05:02:04 does it have graphics support? 05:02:19 what kind of net drivers r available 4 it? 05:02:44 ihavent found such topics in its faq 05:02:45 no, and not many 05:02:58 rtl8139? 05:03:17 real time clock 05:03:44 I don't see much use in combining a forth with a general purpose OS, though 05:03:52 well, I mean, there are some good things 05:04:03 but at that point you might as well just run gforth under Linux and be done with it 05:05:01 * davidw goes to the thinking room 05:05:46 well well well... 05:17:14 ? 05:19:46 Does anyone know how to get the value of 'errno' in Linux? 05:20:29 by looking at the errno variable?;-) 05:21:25 Well 05:21:32 Where is it? 05:21:57 man errno 05:22:42 Doesn 05:22:58 Doesn't say anything about how to access it from an asm program. 05:23:51 Another thing, how can I allocate memory like with malloc() ? 05:28:01 you could call malloc 05:28:21 errno could well be a macro 05:28:30 necessary for thread safety... 05:29:24 Hmmm 05:29:47 Does a syscall return the negative errno on error? 05:30:20 yeah, usually, but it depends 05:30:24 IIRC 05:31:31 Depend on...? 05:31:51 on the syscall, I imagine 05:32:03 maybe they all return negative numbers 05:32:17 Okay... :) 05:45:55 --- quit: Etaoin ("raise OverFlowError, "Ewwww, now it's all over the floor."") 05:46:11 davidw: linux+gforth is still my choice, but its very limited :( 05:46:34 davidw: coz i need lowlevel keyboard access 05:46:55 onetom: ficl + ecos lets you read the keyboard port directly 05:46:55 davidw: and id like 2 experiment w hicolor graphics 05:47:19 davidw: sure, but not graphics :( 05:47:28 write the driver in forth;-) 05:47:51 thats what id like 2 avoid :) 05:48:04 i hate the pc architecture sooo much :) 05:48:19 well, you are doing it wrong, then. Like chuck moore says, real applications are written for specific hardware 05:48:44 (me doesn't really believe that, but...) 05:48:53 earlier i wrote dos tsrs where ive redefined int8 & the keyb int 05:49:05 but graphics is also a mess.... 05:49:12 no.. 05:49:23 but graphics is more messier.... 05:49:58 & im afraid in protected mode its more complicated 05:50:10 rob_ert: u do asm hackin on pc 05:50:14 ecos lets you access whatever you want 05:50:28 davidw: ithink so... 05:51:22 davidw: uknow im so sick of the pc, that id like 2 some have turnkey stuff 05:52:14 id like 2 have a nice framebuffer w simple byte order 05:52:50 and a custom keyb drv w easily redefinable layout 05:53:07 i think the latest enth/flux should b apropriate 05:53:26 but it doesnt run in vmware w graphics :( 05:53:42 and what i mostly miss is the net connection 05:54:13 there r lotsa tcp/ip implementations 05:54:22 but not net card drivers :( 05:54:41 just those complicated linux drivers 05:54:45 written in C 05:55:02 onetom: ? 05:55:04 and suited 4 the os :( 05:55:10 onetom: I'm coding in asm, yes. 05:55:31 rob_ert: ur experienced in todays graphics card? 05:55:41 Not at all. 05:55:44 rob_ert: imean the low or highlevel access 05:55:47 thats sad :( 05:55:53 I'm mostly doing VGA. 05:55:56 Sometimes SVGA. 05:55:58 rob_ert: and how about protected mode? 05:56:11 svga=? exactly? 05:56:15 onetom: ecos has a few network drivers 05:56:36 davidw: will chk then 05:56:38 onetom: I don't do graphics programming in protected mode. 05:56:38 I've found it pretty simple to write stuff for it 05:56:47 onetom: Only with C libraries such as SVGAlib. 05:57:01 onetom: if you want, I will mail you/dcc you a copy of my latest ecos/ficl 05:57:05 I need a good name for it 06:03:45 davidw: ist it a simple binary? 06:03:45 --- quit: Soap` (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 06:03:50 yep 06:03:52 170K 06:03:57 bootable from a floppy disk 06:03:57 great! 06:04:01 let me c! 06:04:19 im gonna test it 2morrow 06:04:38 What is that, davidw? 06:04:40 when ill b @ home 06:05:10 ecos = highly configurable/portable lil os 06:05:31 want it via email or dcc? 06:05:33 ficl = libc independent forth system writen in C 06:05:41 both? ;) 06:05:55 hermantom@freemail.hu 06:07:19 sent 06:08:02 thx 06:10:38 * davidw goes to eat some food 06:15:52 --- join: Speuler (~l@a161161.upc-a.chello.nl) joined #forth 06:16:03 g'd morning 06:16:36 Morning Speuler. 06:16:49 ah 06:16:57 the_rob 06:17:06 Yeah :) 06:17:27 Speuler: Do you know how I can allocate memory in Linux? 06:17:48 using forth ? 06:18:32 No. Assembly. 06:19:17 would have to look into the malloc/mfree libraries 06:19:20 oh 06:19:22 that's c 06:19:37 should be an int 0x80 syscall 06:19:51 malloc() ? 06:19:52 or ling malloc 06:19:55 link 06:20:29 hmm 06:20:38 maybe the folks on #assembler know ? 06:21:42 Somehow I doubt that :)= 06:21:47 Not much people there. 06:23:14 for getting a quick idea, ltrace gforth -e 100 allocate drop free drop quit could help 06:23:29 alternatively, 06:23:37 for getting a quick idea, strace gforth -e 100 allocate drop free drop quit could help 06:25:01 sorry, 06:25:06 Hmm... 06:25:12 need to put forth cmd between quites quotes 06:25:21 quotes 06:25:25 Okay. 06:25:41 ltrace gforth -e "100 allocate drop free drop quit" 06:26:22 brk is the syscall 06:26:30 Useful program. 06:26:34 davidw: Thanks. 06:28:56 brk and sbrk 06:29:11 strace is a good program to use, also 06:29:41 f^^^**&^*& formula 1 06:41:52 gotta go :( ill b back ~1day later. 06:42:12 Bye onetom. 06:42:18 davidw: thx 4 the stuff. im gonna write report a report about it 06:42:38 rob_ert: we could also continue the discussion later 06:42:56 rob_ert: have u tried vmware, anyway? 06:43:09 Nope. 06:43:14 I use bochs. 06:44:12 and how does it handles graphics? 06:44:22 u gave me a very good idea i think... 06:44:47 im gonna dig into bochs 2 06:44:50 :) 06:45:12 rob_ert: would u try davidws stuff under bochs? 06:45:53 * onetom away -- but answer 4 the log! 06:47:24 Uhm 06:47:32 Maybe I will 06:47:34 Later .) 06:50:14 servus 06:50:19 i'll leave now 06:50:28 moving to alternate qth 06:50:52 * Speuler gone 06:51:17 Bye then. 06:59:49 --- quit: Speuler (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)) 07:23:41 --- join: Etaoin (~david@ljk2-22.sat.net) joined #forth 07:33:52 --- join: I440r (~mark4@1Cust66.tnt1.bloomington.in.da.uu.net) joined #forth 07:34:01 Hey. 07:35:22 hi :) 07:35:31 trying to get headerless words to work right 07:35:39 just added that last nite 07:35:54 it will help with the sockets stuff, keep the dictionary shorter too 08:29:32 --- join: divgrad (~John@194.158.217.236) joined #forth 08:38:06 --- quit: divgrad () 10:17:48 --- join: mur (ammu@baana-62-165-189-112.phnet.fi) joined #forth 10:31:32 --- join: XeF4 (~XeF4@dsl-XIV-08.kotikaista.weppi.fi) joined #forth 10:35:13 --- join: GilbertBSD (~gilbert@max2-83.dacor.net) joined #forth 10:36:28 Hi GilbertBSD 10:37:24 hey all 10:38:43 moi taas 10:39:01 taas? :) 10:39:06 no moi taas sitten :) 10:39:40 Hej Robert 10:39:54 XeF4 http://www.sci.fi/~murina/files/banaa.jpg 10:40:17 Hej . 10:42:48 mitä siitä? :) 10:43:30 In Korean, s'il vous plait. 10:44:05 ei mitään, se oli vain niin kiva etiketti että piti skannata :) 10:44:09 tarra siis 11:01:01 --- quit: rob_ert (":-(") 11:05:48 isforth can now do headerless definitions :) 11:16:50 should i make EOF an auto behead ? 11:17:03 or require people to explicatly behead words they have defined as headerless 11:18:18 tuutkohan lobotomialle? (katso lobotomia.org:ta) 11:18:37 err 11:19:15 auto-behead? 11:20:12 when you swith into headerless mode you make the headerless vocabulary current and point HP (head space pointer) to a temp buffer. 11:20:25 you can switch between headerless and non headerless 11:20:42 switching back to headerfull just puts HP back to where it came from 11:20:53 and makes the previois current the current voc again 11:21:12 when you behead you ERASE every singe thread of the headerless vocabulary 11:21:12 is there some reason you can't just compile, straight away without using a tmp header? 11:21:30 you need to have a header there at compile time for headerless words 11:21:40 so the word can be used by other words in that module 11:21:50 : foo blah blah ; 11:22:00 headers> 11:22:07 : zzz .... foo .... ; 11:22:12 foo is headerless 11:22:17 zzz is headerfull 11:22:29 behead does the actual beheading 11:23:07 it discards the temp header buffer and erases every single thread of the headerless vocabulary 11:23:07 then not necessarily, because I sometimes do split a vocabulary among several files 11:23:15 yes you can 11:23:29 if forth is current 11:23:32 : zzzz .... ; 11:23:36 that just went in forth but if you do 11:23:45 : xyzzy .... ; 11:24:00 headers> \ switch back to headerfull mode 11:24:06 : abc ... ; 11:24:18 xyz was compiled onto the headerless voc 11:24:21 but abs is in forth 11:24:23 I understand, but I don't see why the behaviour should differ in headerless mode 11:24:39 except to encourage discipline and prevent pelople from putting 20-file debug vocabs in a turnkey 11:24:42 all headerless words have to be compiled into the headerless vocabulary 11:24:58 ah. that's why. 11:25:05 they have to be 11:25:37 because if we chained them onto the REAL current vocab we wouldnt be able to delete them without ALOT of chain walking 11:25:44 and relinking etc 11:26:28 when you do when you do headers> it restores current to what it realy is 11:27:05 the only restriction being when you are within a but you CAN change the search order 11:27:22 then behead should occur at end-of-session imo 11:27:30 not eof 11:27:31 which you cannot do with other forths beheading mechanism 11:27:36 no. eof 11:27:57 thats how it is in C too 11:28:06 you have to explicatly export globals in c 11:28:06 --- join: thefox (fox@adsl-209-182-168-45.value.net) joined #forth 11:28:06 --- mode: ChanServ set +o thefox 11:28:19 in forht you have to explicatly declare a word as private 11:28:39 thefox i just got headerless words working in isforth but i wanna know if i should make eof an auto behead 11:28:41 yes, so why the added inconsistency? 11:28:56 its not inconsistent wht forth :) 11:29:10 its just the opposite to c 11:29:39 I can't top that statement. ;-) 11:30:03 in c you declare a function as global. in forht you declare it as private. but with both forth and c private words are private to the specific module 11:30:08 i.e. within that source file 11:30:37 I think it is funny that Elizabeth Rather says that when teaching Forth sometimes experienced programmers have the hardest time until they say, Oh, I get it, everything is backwards compared to what I am used to! 11:31:00 should eof be an auto behead or should i REQUIRE a behead 11:31:18 actually if i require a behead you can make words private to 2 or 3 different source files 11:31:51 as long as you dont create more than 8k's worth of headerfull words 11:32:12 thefox - c has it wrong :P 11:32:48 i would consider not beheading at the end of each file - so that the next file can see the headerless words - as being bad form 11:33:15 you should require a behead. 11:33:24 if word A needs to see word B then either B should have a header or both A and B should be in the same file 11:33:47 XeF4: thats what ive got but that leaves it possible to FORGET to behead :) 11:33:57 C is consistent with C, Forth is consistent with Forth, mixing them has problems. 11:34:03 if word A needs to see word B, word A should occur before a Module; or whatever you call your behead 11:34:25 one module is one source file. 11:34:39 or would you consider a module to be a vocabulary ? 11:34:41 I440r: that's how bigforth has it and I have never had amnesia problems 11:34:55 all headerless words in the FOO vocab being visible to all other words in the FOO vocab? 11:34:58 that would be difficult 11:35:52 heh i looked at FPC's words to do this and gave up trying to figure them out after 30 seconds and went away and wrote it myself heh 11:36:31 i think my way is better - you can change the search order when doing headerless words for a start 11:36:44 you just cant change current when your you can change current after the next headers> tho 11:38:18 i never used to like the idea of headerless words when i used fpc 11:38:29 but now i see one huge benifit of using thyem 11:38:39 it keeps the cruft out of the vocabularies 11:38:48 "words" shows less BS than it used to now heh 11:42:42 In many Forths today WORDS is useless. You hit enter twice as fast as you can an before the stop the 11:42:52 scroll hundreds of words are off the screen. 11:43:16 isforth only shows vocabs that are in context and we have scrollback in linux - but yes 11:43:31 there is one thing that bugs me tho since implementing REAL threading 11:43:49 the words display is all done thread by thread, not in order of creation 11:48:12 hehe all of the words in my header.f file are hederless except header> i realy need to be writing howtos for isforth 11:49:10 some sort of doccumentation explaining how/what/where and why i did things 11:49:42 problem is - my code makes me look 1337 but my english makes me look stoopid :P 11:51:30 that undo of defered word is a classic examole of "lets see just how idiotic we can be" lol 11:56:04 anyone think bodyless words would be useful? - they would exist until you next saved the system (fsave or turnkey) 11:56:31 would be able to do this using a similar mechanism im using to create headerless words 11:56:52 instead of redirecting headers i could redirect list space 11:57:12 they get lost when you save-system because you want them to get lost? 11:57:19 yews 11:57:19 yes 11:57:40 I440r: for macros/immediates, it would be useful. 11:57:44 you could compile a bodyless ." do you want this or that option" key if 11:57:59 xef4 yes 11:58:16 eventually the entire compiler vocabulary will be discarded on turnkey - but not on fsave 11:59:34 I always just moved the code and name pointers outside of the saved memory area and just patch the dictionaries to cut the stuff out before saving. 11:59:38 would raise a problem if anyone tried to compile a bodyless word into something tho 11:59:55 thefox yes thats what im taking about 12:00:08 but making it automatic using something similar to the headerless mechanism 12:00:31 but there are dangers with bodyless that dont exist with headerless 12:01:10 a bodyless definition has a body right up to the next time you save so you can compile the bodyless word.... instant segv at runtime :) 12:01:33 could make a "not compilable" flag :) 12:01:50 isforth doesnt implement "compile only" flag - its a flaw but... bleh 12:02:12 you try do a ." foo" at the prompt and you get what you deserve :P 12:04:02 ugh- the forth vocab is still too fat :P 12:04:24 hmm 12:05:57 --- quit: mur ("bbl maybe") 12:07:12 hum. could you implement some flag that only allows a word to be compiled within its own wordlist? 12:08:05 you want that ? 12:08:37 that makes it hidden to anyone except its own vocabulary 12:08:37 no, but I was thinking it could solve some of the problems with disembodied words 12:08:44 btw i dislike the word wordlist 12:09:20 since you could compile bodied words only into other bodyless words 12:09:30 and it seems like it could be a useful general tool anyway 12:09:31 I440r: there seem to be about a dozen regulars who are hanging out whenever I have visted the room. 12:09:53 thefox yes and most of those are on permanant idle :P 12:10:09 but even so - we have 4 or 5 ACTIVE regulars 12:10:37 air is usually active in his own channel 12:10:59 whgo is air? 12:11:07 oops whois air? 12:11:12 he runs #osdev 12:11:17 oh I see. 12:11:20 he is writing his own operating system 12:11:24 called brix i think :) 12:11:40 or is brix the name of the compiler. bleh i cant remember: ) 12:11:58 ive seen everyone in here speak at one time or other 12:12:16 I have never seen cdesousa speak. 12:12:17 it could be a timezone thing or an "imm to lazy to talk" thing :) 12:13:16 so are you gonna write a book to accompany isFORTH? 12:13:22 what is the 'is' part n e way/ 12:13:39 heh thers a story behind why i chose "is" 12:13:57 there was a guy used to hang out in #debian all the time and he and i were ASLWAYS at each others throats 12:14:22 he considered me a lamer and i considered him... well... lets just say we had a personality conflict 12:14:23 he 12:14:40 why cause you didn't like c? 12:14:58 i named isforth after him as a means of doing pennance for not being more tolerant of him 12:15:09 plus. i like the motto... isforth, because forth IS 12:15:16 if anyone asks me what forth "IS" 12:15:28 i say - everythying after the word IS in the motto is UP TO YOU 12:15:34 forth is what ever you decide it is 12:15:42 forth is user defineable 12:15:51 ah okay. 12:15:54 so does he know this? 12:15:59 lol no 12:16:12 did you permanently kick him offline? 12:16:17 and he doesnt come on here much any more - theres anotehr guy called is who hangs in #debian now 12:16:22 im not an irc op :P 12:16:43 ah his screen name was IS? 12:16:50 yes 12:16:52 --- nick: GilbertBSD -> is 12:16:55 lol 12:16:58 hmm it is unregistered. 12:17:12 --- nick: is -> GilbertBSD 12:17:19 weird because thers someone else who comes on opn who uses that nick now 12:20:02 so how is the job search going these days? 12:20:09 :( 12:20:39 still waiting on call from recruitor weather or not i get the job he foned me about 12:21:16 and ONE of the agancies i sent my resume to sounded more posative than the others 12:21:30 just a feeling that they might be able to place me... not sure 12:21:41 but i still dont have a job :P 12:21:49 will let everyone know if i get one 12:22:06 that doesn't sound encouraging at all. 12:22:17 LIttle chance of me getting a job at this rate :( 12:22:26 i must have sent my resume to 50 or more different agencies 12:22:45 most never sent a reply. most of those taht did sent an auto reply 12:23:08 one recruitor sent me a letter saying thankyou but your resume wasnt attached heheh 12:23:20 so sent it back to her heh 12:23:23 do you not have a resume? 12:23:36 i do - it just wasnt attached to the first email i sent to her 12:24:18 but what kind of programming/computer related experience do you have? 12:24:31 what do they want that you are not giving them? 12:24:39 real-time embedded control applications 12:25:00 in assembler. on ANY processor/controller. if i dont knnow it just give me the manual and ill be an expert in a few hours 12:25:08 forth and c too 12:25:42 so you are looking for embedded control jobs mostly? 12:25:56 i dont do anything else 12:26:00 i dont do windows 12:26:08 i dont do "web development" 12:26:27 I440r: did you ever see the documentation on Intel's iapx432? 12:26:57 nope 12:27:08 would that take me longer than a few hours ? heh 12:27:25 ive never seen one thus far that took longer than a few hours for me to get confident about coding anything in 12:27:32 THUS FAR that is 12:27:38 it wasn't just 'any' processor, very wierd and thick manuals. The assembler from Intel cost $150,000. 12:27:54 lol - is it as weird as an nec 75x ? 12:27:59 now thats a weird one 12:28:10 no status flags for a start 12:28:19 plus its only 4 bits :P 12:29:41 432 was a weird as anything I have seen. 32-bit, 3 chip mainframe set, with object oriented programming in hardware. Microcode to support processor objects and process objects and complexity up the wazoo. 12:30:12 ouch - remind me to not try learning that one heh 12:30:21 i am diametrically opposed to OOP in All cases :) 12:30:29 some OOP methodology is good 12:30:29 the 150k pricetag on their assembler should be a warning sign. 12:30:36 overall oop is horrible 12:30:41 ya 12:31:04