00:00:00 --- log: started forth/02.08.11 00:35:22 --- quit: empirion ("ùíù Total uptime : 1d 13h 39m 17s") 02:03:00 --- quit: kc5tja ("THX QSO ES 73 DE KC5TJA/6 CL ES QRT AR SK") 02:20:02 --- quit: Fractal ("My damn controlling terminal disappeared!") 02:21:33 --- join: Fractal (cerzi@h24-77-171-228.ok.shawcable.net) joined #forth 07:05:13 --- join: kc5tja (~kc5tja@ip68-8-206-226.sd.sd.cox.net) joined #forth 09:37:01 --- nick: kc5tja -> kc-store 10:42:09 --- quit: kc-store (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 10:54:36 --- join: kc5tja (~kc5tja@ip68-8-206-226.sd.sd.cox.net) joined #forth 10:54:54 Lost network connectivity... :( 11:53:09 --- join: I440r (~mark4@1Cust177.tnt2.bloomington.in.da.uu.net) joined #forth 11:56:10 sup yo i440r! 11:59:15 not much 11:59:55 what's your forth coding up to 12:00:08 im doing the assembler rite now 12:00:09 well 12:00:15 not right NOW hehe 12:00:20 im not doin nuttin rite now :) 12:00:27 like my double negative ? 12:00:33 cause you are on irc 12:00:44 and you are daydreaming about playing on MUDs!!! 12:00:47 no cuz im tried heh 12:02:39 get cracking on the forth mud! 12:03:41 hrm hrm hrm 12:03:51 i'm sort of working on a forth irc client 12:03:55 using netcat.. 12:03:58 yiu did? 12:04:01 but it's cumbersome 12:04:03 netcat ? 12:04:05 so i'm going to switch to sockets 12:04:29 netcat connects to the server and uses stdin and stdout of the program 12:05:11 oh 12:05:32 like ucspi-tcp 12:53:14 --- join: jamc (~dne@as3-6-8.asp.s.bonet.se) joined #forth 12:54:07 hi jamc 12:54:24 ho ho 12:56:33 Hmmm....I think I can make myself a really affordable and portable antenna mast. 12:56:42 It'll need a portable hole if I'm going to take it out on the field though. 12:56:55 lol 12:57:31 Basically two pieces of 6' long pieces of threaded PVC pipe, with a coupler in the middle so I can join them together. 12:57:37 Then U-bolt it to my balcony banister. 12:57:51 The top of the mast is also threaded to support whatever antenna I want. 12:58:09 * kc5tja likes the idea of this... 12:58:16 brb...going to the hardware store. 13:23:49 i heard that if you bend the antenna every inch at 45 degrees or something like that, and create a fractal out of the whole antenna it gets much better reception 13:25:18 Nope 13:25:34 It gets less reception. 13:26:10 However, the tradeoff is that it remains resonant, and the bandwidth of the antenna remains roughly the same for its smaller size. 13:26:15 So you can fit it into a tighter space. 13:26:37 the guy that discovered the property patented it.. 13:27:01 That doesn't mean jack diddley. 13:27:30 Patent office recently issued a patent for an ordinary swing set where the child swings sideways instead of front to back. 13:27:40 heh 13:27:45 (never mind the fact I and every other kid was doing that 20+ years ago) 13:29:34 They work -- don't get me wrong on that. They do have useful properties. But they don't work as the inventor claims. And that's where his fault lies. 13:30:07 For example, a lot of cell phones now use fractal antenna systems because they can get good enough reception in a smaller package, with no visible antennas. 13:43:10 kc5 yea - a dragon curve with the corners rounded off can fit quite a long length antenna in a small space 13:43:21 i had thunked of that about 4 or 5 years ago 13:43:52 but i didnt knnow if a curvy antenna would work 13:43:59 is it purely lenght of antenna ? 13:44:45 Electrical length versus physical length, yes. 13:44:50 It has to be resonant, like a pipe organ. 13:45:22 You can have non-resonant antennas, but they will not function the same as a resonant antenna (e.g., reception is very poor, few people will hear you on transmitting, etc) 13:46:17 A lot of those FCC Part 15 devices will use non-resonant antennas, because space is more important than efficiency. 13:47:32 Hmm.... 13:47:40 * kc5tja thinks he heard his first meteor scatter on 10m band. 13:49:19 just now ? 13:49:22 Yeah 13:49:27 cool 13:49:29 Leonids are tomorrow. 13:49:34 aha!!! 13:49:41 is that the one from casiopia? 13:50:05 I'm monitoring 28.380MHz and it was dead up until a few seconds ago, when I heard someone chatting for about 3 seconds. Now it's dead again. 13:50:10 No, those are the Cassiopeids. :) 13:50:21 Leonids are from the constellation of Leo. 13:50:26 oh 13:50:32 i dunno where that is in teh sky hehe 13:50:46 It's hard to explain; easier to show. 13:50:51 Anyway, I gotta go. Food time. 13:50:54 --- nick: kc5tja -> kc-food 14:35:06 --- quit: rob_ert ("leaving") 14:35:32 --- join: Robert (~Robert@robost86.tsps1.freenet6.net) joined #forth 14:37:17 wb robert :) 14:37:57 how was your trip to germany? 14:37:59 :) 14:38:17 Fine, fine.. Was in .dk, .de, .be, .fr and .lu :) 14:38:24 heheh 14:38:43 poor me, i've only been in .ca :P 14:38:57 .ca? 14:39:02 the canada ? 14:39:09 Hi I440r :) 14:39:16 futhin: Bah! 14:39:17 hi rob :) 14:39:35 .ca = canada 14:39:37 I've been in...more countries than my tired brain can count to (that is, probably more than 2). 14:40:54 usa, engbland, france, germany, norway, scotland, wales, africa, madagascar, west indies.... 14:40:58 prolly more 14:41:03 erm england even heh 14:42:02 Um.. 14:42:05 "Africa"? 14:43:30 yea 14:43:37 ive lived in most of those countries 14:43:43 not just "visited" 14:44:39 how did you survive (make a living) in those countries? 14:46:15 non 14:46:17 i was a kid :) 14:46:21 my father worked for nasa 14:46:41 Uhm... well, "Africa" is a continent rather like a country. It's kinda big, iirc :P 14:46:41 cool 14:46:47 had to move arround alot cuz he would have to go to a tracking station and eithe fix it or rebuild it 14:46:58 did your father also code forth for nasa ? 14:47:00 i only vizited africa :) 14:47:12 futhin back then there was NO forth :) 14:47:18 heh 14:47:27 Hehe 14:47:27 argh, i forgot you are older than 30 years :P 14:47:38 hrm 14:47:45 i actually don't know how old you are i440r 14:47:52 good :) 14:47:56 i saw some pictures but you weren't that old.. 14:47:59 35 maybe 14:48:10 30 to 35? 14:48:11 heh 14:48:30 * Robert guesses on 37. 14:48:35 Where are those pics, btw? 14:49:10 what pix ? 14:49:23 oh 14:49:24 hehe 14:49:27 they were on water's server or tunes server or whatever 14:49:27 Of you, those futhin talked about. 14:49:30 no fotos of /me - i hate fotos of /me :P 14:49:35 argh! 14:49:36 heh 14:49:39 heheh 14:49:40 Hehe 14:50:21 bbl 14:50:24 coding assembler 14:59:28 IsForth assembler? 14:59:43 Has tcn given that project away? 15:01:26 i440r is coding the assembler himsefl 15:04:08 Started from scratch? 15:04:31 yeah i think so 15:05:03 Oh... 15:11:26 --- nick: kc-food -> kc5tja 15:11:55 Hi kc5tja :) 15:12:22 rehi 15:13:00 * Robert is back from his vacation in Germany :) 15:13:27 Just got my own personal idle record, a bit less than 2 weeks. ;) 15:13:49 * kc5tja is listening on 10m band for meteor scatter effects. 15:14:17 Heh. 15:14:23 Do you hear anything? 15:14:32 pr0n! 15:14:48 fr0th pr0n! 15:14:54 Well, it comes and it goes. 15:15:13 It manifests itself in being able to hear a more distance conversation than you normally can hear. 15:15:30 So the best way to listen for it is to listen on a dead part of the band, and wiat for something to come up. 15:15:37 It'll last around 3 to 5 seconds or so, then fade away. 15:16:49 * Robert just read the last 2 books in Arthur C Clarke's triology about Rama. 15:17:09 Last one was more about politics than science fiction. 15:20:57 yeah, Rama sucked 15:21:02 i read the first 3 books 15:22:58 Are there more? 15:23:16 um, i thought so 15:23:31 Well, I found them quite OK... 15:23:34 maybe i've onmly read the first 2 and there are 3 out there.. or i've read the first 3 and there are 4 or 5 out there 15:24:02 But they should have stopped earlier ;) 15:24:32 The triology ends with a Japenese dictator taking over the Rama ship. 15:25:00 * Robert thought "heh", when he had read the last one. 15:25:38 umm.. 15:25:50 i sucks :P 15:25:52 it 15:25:54 sucks 15:25:55 rama sucks 15:25:58 heh 15:26:07 it is _barely_ sci-fi 15:27:21 Well, I like politics about as much as I like sci-fi. 15:27:38 And...well, some sci-fi is more fiction than science ;-) 15:27:44 Much more.- 15:27:59 read books by Greg Egan, those are good hard sci-fi 15:28:24 read First Contract by Costikyan excellent book 15:29:09 Uhm... are they a bit more likley than e.g. Rama? ;) 15:29:36 pardon? 15:29:40 rephrase that 15:29:52 are they more realistic? or are they more enjoyable ? 15:30:48 realistic* 15:30:59 absolutely 15:31:02 Sorry, my english isn't as good as I want it to be :-/ 15:32:24 Thanks for the tips :) 15:32:33 * Robert needs a book or two. 15:32:33 Man you guys are still talking about this crap?! 15:32:41 You guys need to get into some GOOD literature. 15:32:41 What crap? 15:32:47 Hah. 15:32:48 Like? 15:33:01 I have a genuine Intel 80386SX Microprocessor Programmers Reference Manual, Volume 2, in MINT CONDITION!! 15:33:06 heheh 15:33:15 technical documents aren't literature :P 15:33:16 :) 15:33:25 Sure they are. "Technical literature," they're called. ;D 15:34:14 Uhmm... manuals != literature, everyone knows that :) "If you can't write, write manuals." <-- never heard that? 15:34:34 Nope. 15:34:39 Bah :( 15:34:47 And it is literature. Just not artistic. 15:34:56 Well, I rarley read anything else than novels. 15:35:10 And books about history. 15:35:10 Not me. I can't read novels. THey put me to sleep. 15:35:15 yuck, intel! :) 15:35:23 jamc: ;) 15:35:34 kc5tja: Same thing with many tech. docs here. 15:40:20 ive found some errors in the intel instruction formats and encodings dock :) 15:40:26 doc 15:40:29 even 15:40:33 So have I. 15:41:03 ya. has anyone told intel about them ? :) 15:41:15 kc5tja: you read business books with no problem tho? :) 15:41:41 If they're interesting enough to me, definitely. 15:41:54 Mostly I read Physics journals and math texts. 15:45:02 I'm interested about math about 1% of my time. 15:58:34 ok now i got a problem :P 15:58:46 erm, maybe not 15:59:03 brb -- we have company. 15:59:04 fuck 15:59:21 how do i distintuish between 15:59:28 mov reg, address and 15:59:28 mov reg, [address] 15:59:35 this is a bitch 16:00:04 erm i could use $ for offset 16:00:06 mov eax, $ address 16:00:16 ? 16:00:20 Well... 16:00:26 That sucks :) 16:00:37 Just treat "address" as a constant. 16:00:46 And parse expressions within [ and ]. 16:01:04 call $ address 16:01:04 call $[ address ]: 16:01:16 Imagine how easy [myconstant*4+(eax*4)+ecx] will be to parse :) 16:01:34 robert i need to be able to distinguish between NO address specified, direct address and indirect address 16:01:34 no 16:01:34 NO parsing 16:01:40 No? :) 16:01:40 I440r: hmm, what are you doing? 16:01:54 Are the instructions forth words? 16:02:05 writing an assembler extension for isforth 16:02:26 robert yes there are. and NONE of them parse 16:02:27 aha... prefix? 16:02:44 and its not 5 # ax mov either 16:02:44 mov eax, # 5 16:03:09 I440r: Well, I'd just have some sort of ] word that checks what's on the stack, and creates the addressing bytes, 16:03:39 jamc want to see what i got so far ? 16:03:39 Heh. 16:03:52 I440r: How does that work with complex things? 16:03:56 robert i cant leave the address on the stack 16:04:31 u mean like mov eax,[ebx+2*ecx+1234] ? 16:04:34 I mean, NASM-style i386 assembly isn't THAT easy to parse :) 16:04:40 ull see 16:04:42 uhm, well postfix seems more natural, kinda :) 16:04:53 Hmm... 16:04:58 heh 16:04:58 hard to explain 16:05:15 * Robert waits >:) 16:05:26 5 # ax mov is totally unreadable to me, i spend 99% of my time trying to figure out what each instruction is doing and i lose track of the flow of the function 16:06:18 hmm, then why forth? :) 16:06:42 I440r: Comments! >:) 16:06:47 fuck the address thing is going to be a PROBLEM 16:06:49 fuck 16:07:15 I440r: How much would you need the assembler for? 16:07:21 my assembler distinguishes between source and destination registers witha comma 16:07:27 [eax] 16:07:37 source index/base reg 16:07:46 eax, destinmation register 16:08:04 mov eax, [ebx] [ecx] +2* [edx] 16:08:15 erm no 16:08:15 cant do that 16:08:18 As if that was readable... 16:08:26 or can you 16:08:26 shit im confusing myself now 16:09:02 [ebx] runs the word ALL index/base reg words run. 16:09:02 ebx's reg number gets put in a variable called BASE 16:09:20 next time a base/index reg gets executed its reg number gets put in INDEX because base is used 16:09:23 well using prefix in a postfix language is confusing, yes :) 16:09:28 so we have a base and an index 16:09:32 Hehe. 16:09:57 I440r: Quite smart >:) When is the opcode actuallty written to the memory buffer? 16:10:08 jamc no not assembler 16:10:18 how would you code 16:10:33 mov [ebx+4*edx+1234], #55 16:10:48 THAT would be fucking confusing backwards 16:11:36 i think i need to make $ parsing :( 16:11:41 mov eax, $ some-address 16:11:42 I440r: If I do "xchg eax, ecx" or whatever, when is 0x91 written to the memory buffer? 16:11:54 worse i think it needs to INTERPRET 16:12:02 mov eax, $ ' foo >body 16:12:16 nope. fuck 16:12:24 i NEED to have the address on the stack 16:12:24 cant NOT have 16:12:32 which is fucking me over big time 16:12:41 how does the assembler KNOW theres an item on the stack 16:12:50 with immediates its known 16:12:50 # tells us 16:12:50 mov eax, # 5 16:13:01 mov eax, myvar 16:13:19 when MOV executes HOW does it know MYVAR is on the stack ? 16:13:23 I440r: can't you borrow ideas from someone else's (prefix) assembler? 16:13:38 MPE, Forth Inc... 16:13:41 im NOT making every fucking word stack depth aware on entry 16:14:02 jamc ive studied and studied every other prefix assembler i can get my hands on 16:14:24 and they are all obfuscated 16:14:24 im sure mine will be too 16:14:32 probably :) 16:15:23 i COULD do $: address ;$ hehe 16:15:28 $: says were gona get an address 16:15:39 everything up to the ;$ is interpreted normally 16:15:49 and ;$ stores the address away for later assembly 16:15:53 but that LOOKS fucked 16:16:15 $[ address ] 16:16:20 is easy 16:16:24 CONTENTS of address 16:17:10 --- part: I440r left #forth 16:17:20 --- join: I440r (~mark4@1Cust177.tnt2.bloomington.in.da.uu.net) joined #forth 16:17:22 oopts 16:17:23 and the expression inside will be postfix? 16:17:46 it will be interpreted 16:17:58 $[ ' foo >body ] 16:18:11 mov eax, ' myconstant >body 16:18:19 mov ' myconstant >body eax 16:18:27 ok, well well 16:31:38 i cant see any way arround it 16:31:48 either i need to make EVERY word stack depth aware, 16:31:54 do some parsing 16:32:13 what's the problem? 16:32:19 or use $fuckedupshit some-address $more-fuckedup-shit 16:32:23 mov ax, # 5 is fine 16:32:28 mov eax, $%^&%^$% address *^&*%*&^&$& 16:32:30 now you want to do what? 16:32:49 mov $1234 +ax, # 5 ? 16:33:06 i NEED to have a way of telling when a number on the stack is an immediate, an a direct address or an indirect address 16:33:34 # = immediate $ = direct @ = indirect 16:33:42 HOW do i encode mov eax, SOME-ADDRESS 16:33:58 and am i moving teh OFFSET to some-address or the CONTENTS!!! 16:34:03 is the address direct or indirect ? 16:34:38 actually, a direct address is basically an immediate 16:34:42 mov eax, # some-address 16:34:49 mov eax, contents-of-some-address 16:34:53 MOV AX, 5 (IMMEDIATE) MOV AX, [1234] (DIRECT) MOV AX, ?? (INDIRECT) ? 16:35:11 futhin i CANT have [NUMBER-IN-HERE] 16:35:18 [1234] = contents of some address 16:35:19 so 16:35:23 you are using $ 16:35:23 it would have to be [ number ] 16:35:25 instead of [ ] 16:35:41 futhin i would have to have $ parse and interpret 16:35:44 erm 16:35:45 maybe not 16:35:49 but. 16:35:55 how were you going to do: MOV AX, [BX+1234] with your assembler ? 16:35:58 mov $ address # 5 16:36:06 there NO comma in that statement 16:36:12 MOV AX, [ BX 1234 + ] ??? 16:36:20 and for consistency i insist all sources and destinations are sperated by a comma 16:36:32 and im NOT redefining , itself 16:36:38 : , ; 16:36:41 hrm 16:36:49 mov [eax], # 5 16:37:00 mov [[ address ]], # 5 ? 16:37:16 in this case [[ would be a NOOP 16:37:38 you cant do: mov [1234], 5 16:37:41 what are you talking about 16:37:41 or would set a flag so that ]], would have syntax 16:37:55 futhing [1234] is not a word 16:38:09 and im NOT going to fucking parse for a number wrapped up in [] 16:38:14 when i type: mov [1234], 5 i am talking NASM 16:38:22 there woudl HAVE to be SPACES in there 16:38:26 [ NUMBER ] 16:38:29 when i type: mov [ 1234 ], # 5 i am talking isforth assembler 16:38:38 but again. im NOT redefining [ and ] 16:38:44 would have to be [[ ]] or something 16:38:50 stop 16:38:55 let me clarify myself 16:39:13 and [[ and ]] will ONLY work when specifying an OFFSET to an address 16:39:29 NASM syntax: mov eax, [bx+1234] how are you going to represent that in IsForth assembler ?? 16:39:32 mov eax, address \ mov offset to address into eax 16:39:44 NASM syntax: mov eax, [bx+1234] how are you going to represent that in IsForth assembler ?? 16:39:47 [ebx] [ebx], 16:39:54 mov [ebx], blah 16:40:00 NASM syntax: mov eax, [bx+1234] how are you going to represent that in IsForth assembler ?? 16:40:15 im not 16:40:22 because bx as an address will NOT be supported 16:40:35 [ebx] $+ 1234 16:40:56 mov [eax], [ebx] [eax] $+ 1234 16:41:12 no cant do that hehe 16:41:21 mov eax, [ebx] [ecx] etc etc 16:41:24 is legal 16:41:25 what's wrong with mov [eax], [ebx] [eax] $+ 1234 ?? 16:41:33 okay, it's fine 16:41:34 its memory to memory 16:41:41 er 16:41:41 cant do that hehe 16:41:43 yeah, you can't do that 16:41:52 mov eax, [ebx] [eax] $+ 1234 16:42:02 okay 16:42:11 yes and no 16:42:16 so what's the problem ? 16:42:22 what are you trying to do now? 16:42:29 u dont understand 16:42:36 the 1234 will be on the stack 16:42:43 thats not acceptable right now 16:42:48 i might HAVE to do it that way 16:42:51 but i dont WANT to 16:43:01 what if i have both an immediate and an address on the stack 16:43:06 or an address and an offset 16:43:20 i.e. move int-this-address,the-offset-to-this-address 16:43:35 that would be mov [address],#address 16:43:36 hrm 16:43:43 but immediates are always on the stack 16:43:57 im also trying to minimize error checking 16:44:37 and if i have offsets and immediates as sepreate entities ill have to check for the case of one of each at same time 16:45:02 mov [eax] [ebx] $+ 1234 COMMA-GOES-HERE #5 16:45:08 im NOT having comma redefined! 16:45:22 but i want all sources and destinations comma seperated 16:45:27 mov [eax], ebx 16:45:29 like that 16:45:49 mov [[ some-complex-address-specified-in-here ]], eax 16:45:52 will work for me 16:46:08 except it LOOKS like SHIT 16:46:18 erm 16:46:42 mov address $+ [eax] +8* [ecx], #5 ? 16:46:57