00:00:00 --- log: started forth/02.09.13
00:04:39 --- quit: proteusguy (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
00:04:59 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
00:21:16 --- join: Serg_penguin (~Z@nat-ch1.nat.comex.ru) joined #forth
00:21:24 <Serg_penguin> hi
00:23:15 --- quit: Serg_penguin (Client Quit)
00:26:53 --- quit: Klaw ("upchuck")
01:00:12 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
01:05:27 --- quit: proteusguy (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
01:05:34 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
01:51:59 --- join: qless (~cerberus@mani.kobayashimaru.org) joined #forth
01:52:10 <qless> hi
01:53:44 --- part: qless left #forth
02:04:57 --- join: proteus (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
02:05:54 --- quit: proteusguy (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
02:39:02 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth
03:04:31 --- quit: proteus (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
03:04:32 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer))
03:04:56 --- join: proteus (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
03:36:31 --- quit: proteus (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
03:47:51 --- join: proteus (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
04:21:51 --- join: cleverdra (julianf@0-2pool111-108.nas2.florence1.sc.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth
04:46:49 --- part: Speuler left #forth
04:47:34 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth
04:52:23 --- join: Serg_penguin (~Z@nat-ch1.nat.comex.ru) joined #forth
04:52:26 <Serg_penguin> hi
04:57:02 --- join: sif (~sifforth@ip68-14-11-203.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth
04:57:02 <sif> Type sif: <forth code here> (or /msg sif <forth code here> to play in private)
05:04:32 --- quit: proteus (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
05:04:42 --- quit: Serg_penguin ()
05:05:09 --- join: proteus (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
05:34:27 --- join: Serg_penguin (~Z@nat-ch1.nat.comex.ru) joined #forth
05:34:35 <Serg_penguin> hi
05:56:55 --- quit: proteus (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
05:58:03 --- join: Klaw (~chuck@ip68-96-75-80.oc.oc.cox.net) joined #forth
05:58:47 <Serg_penguin> hi
06:05:41 --- join: proteus (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
06:25:47 <Klaw> hi
06:27:33 --- join: Herkamire (~jason@wsip68-15-54-54.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth
06:32:15 <Serg_penguin> hi
06:39:51 <Herkamire> hi :)
06:40:05 <Klaw> ih
06:40:17 <Klaw> so i asked if there was a forth httpd available
06:40:23 <Klaw> other than one common example..
06:40:27 <Herkamire> Klaw: yes :)
06:40:31 <Klaw> And i get.. one for purchase from MPE.. and that's it..
06:40:46 <Klaw> Kind of depressing
06:40:56 <Herkamire> depressing?
06:40:59 <Klaw> yes
06:41:12 <Klaw> I had my hopes up that i could find one.. and they were shattered
06:41:21 <Klaw> crushed dreams of httpd forthing..
06:41:32 <Herkamire> it shouldn't be that hard to write if you have syscalls or socket support
06:41:49 <Klaw> i've seen a few linux forths w/ their own socket support
06:42:00 <Klaw> and the example piggy backs on tcpserver from djb
06:42:07 <Serg_penguin> seek for eserv - Russian httpd in spf(orth)
06:42:11 <Herkamire> you can hook most forths in as a CGI script for apache
06:42:38 <Herkamire> Klaw: tcpserver is great
06:42:40 <cleverdra> Klaw - gforth comes with an example httpd
06:42:47 <Klaw> see i ask this in the mailing list
06:42:55 <Klaw> it didn't help.. which i why i came to irc :)
06:43:21 <Herkamire> Klaw: this channel is pretty good about answering questions. and we even stay on topic quite a bit :)
06:43:42 <Herkamire> Klaw: do you have gforth?
06:43:50 <Serg_penguin> using 'example' for REAL THING ?
06:44:15 <Klaw> i have gforth
06:44:23 <Klaw> http://www.eserv.ru/ that eserv?
06:44:30 <Serg_penguin> russian ESERV httpd is commercial, earlier versions - go with SP FORTH as example :)
06:44:32 <Herkamire> I like the idea of using tcpserver :) :) I might write a forth webserver that uses it.
06:44:34 <Serg_penguin> brb
06:45:23 <Herkamire> it would just be a pain parsing all the headers
06:45:47 <cleverdra> Herkamire - all what headers, for what?
06:45:55 <Herkamire> http headers
06:46:08 <cleverdra> Herkamire - no such thing exists.
06:46:09 <Herkamire> involved in writing a webserver
06:46:18 <Klaw> they are simple
06:46:26 <Klaw> key: value\r\n
06:47:07 <Herkamire> I suppose the server outputs headers more than it parses them
06:47:11 <Klaw> you've got set-cookie, accept-encoding, host and that covers the bases
06:47:34 <Klaw> server outputs the filesize, cookies, and some other basic info, nothing too difficult though
06:48:26 <Herkamire> that doesn't sound to bad. I just have to support GET and POST data, URL encoding, and a few headers.
06:48:35 <Klaw> i've done it in php a few times
06:48:39 <Herkamire> I won't support cookies
06:48:46 <Klaw> cookies is easy
06:48:54 <Herkamire> I don't like cookies
06:49:07 <Klaw> well if you don't have an ecommerce site, you don't need them
06:49:19 <Klaw> basic auth is a nice one though
06:49:31 <Herkamire> we write eccomerce sites at work. and we don't use cookies
06:49:41 <Klaw> you have to stick the session id under every link imaginable
06:49:58 * Serg_penguin never trusts http auth
06:50:12 * Klaw is a realist
06:50:14 <Klaw> :P
06:50:20 <Serg_penguin> session id are easily fakeable
06:50:24 <Herkamire> I still think http auth is better
06:50:33 <Herkamire> way way way less complicated
06:50:57 <Herkamire> and you don't have to have BS about timouts and ip hopping etc
06:51:09 <Klaw> session ids are fakeable, but you can't go and guess a 32 character alphanumeric string
06:51:37 <Klaw> the point is just to keep a shopping cart up for the majority of consumers
06:51:50 <Herkamire> the insecurity with http auth is all on the client side. if they care about security they will already have a secure browser.
06:53:55 --- quit: Serg_penguin ()
06:55:45 <Klaw> tcpserver has to launch gforth for each hit
06:55:59 <Herkamire> bummer.
06:56:08 <Herkamire> I'm not going to use gforth.
06:56:24 <Klaw> well i mean.. that's what tcpserver does, it launches the program each time
06:56:48 <Klaw> which is why i was looking for a straight forth httpd
06:56:49 <Herkamire> if I do it, I'll use fpos (which tathi is writing). It is a 2KB binary that doesn't link to anything
06:57:20 <Herkamire> Klaw: don't you want a seperate thread for each request?
06:57:29 <Klaw> yes you will want threading..
06:57:57 <Klaw> but i'd imagine that'd be more efficiently handled within forth
06:58:02 <Klaw> what's fpos
06:58:07 <Herkamire> Klaw: what difference does it make whether the threads are within the forth or not?
06:58:25 <Herkamire> fpos is a natice PPC colorforth
06:58:33 <Herkamire> s/natice/native/
06:58:56 <Herkamire> it will be an operating system eventually
07:04:51 --- join: yeahright (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
07:05:09 --- quit: proteus (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
07:05:53 --- join: tathi (~josh@wsip68-15-54-54.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth
07:12:17 --- join: SYStems (ta7iaMasr@62.12.124.87) joined #forth
07:19:50 <Herkamire> does gforth support multithreading?
07:20:31 --- part: SYStems left #forth
07:22:02 <thin> i don't think so.. but you could code multithreading ontop of a forth ;P
07:23:00 <cleverdra> Herkamire - it doesn't have support for preemptive multitasking; it has a simple cooperative-multitasking library; you might be able to use gforth's lib.fs to deal with C multithreading libraries.
07:23:59 <cleverdra> Depending on what you're doing, fork() might be enough.
07:24:10 <thin> use isforth for doing httpd stuff
07:24:24 <cleverdra> (You won't get concurrency on Erlang's level, of course, without a lot of work :-/)
07:24:25 <thin> cleverdra: you figured out how to do sockets in isforth right ?
07:24:45 <cleverdra> thin - yes; I sent you some code for this, remember?
07:24:48 <thin> what's specially about erlang's multitasking/threading
07:24:55 <thin> cleverdra: yeah, the smudcl?
07:25:12 <thin> or different source code?
07:25:28 <cleverdra> No, that.
07:26:43 <cleverdra> thin - Erlang's threads (it calls them 'processes') are extremely lightweight and communicate though asynchronous message passing.  There's an (old) comparison between Java threads and Erlang processes... one sec.
07:27:34 <cleverdra> http://www.sics.se/~joe/ericsson/du98024.html
07:31:07 <thin> The spawn time for Erlang processes is always 16 us regardless of the number of processes spawned and the OS
07:38:56 <thin> heh
07:39:08 <cleverdra> hm?
07:39:54 <thin> erlang seems to have a pretty good design for the multithreading
07:40:36 <cleverdra> That's my impression.
07:45:09 <Herkamire> what's erlang good for?
07:47:22 <cleverdra> hm?  Many things; it's a general-purpose programming language.  It's first production use was in telephony.  It's not so good right now for unix scripting, but SAE seem to be alleviating that (and I find that I've been using old versions of SAE; I've no idea how good the newer version is)
07:47:35 <thin> for ripping off the multithreading system and implementing that in forth ;)
07:47:47 <cleverdra> SAE: Stand Alone Erlang; generates compact binaries with short start-up times.
07:47:59 <cleverdra> thin - yeah, that wouldn't be a bad use =)
07:51:08 <thin> people should hack with forth more
07:51:15 <thin> they should steal all the good ideas out there for forth!
07:51:16 <thin> :P
07:56:18 --- quit: yeahright (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
07:56:55 --- quit: skylan (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
07:59:04 --- join: skylan (sjh@Riverview86.tbaytel.net) joined #forth
07:59:35 --- join: XeF4 (roter@12-245-111-146.client.attbi.com) joined #forth
08:06:31 --- join: yeahright (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
08:15:36 --- quit: tathi ("leaving")
08:15:38 <Herkamire> cleverdra: might SAE work on PPC linux?
08:16:37 <cleverdra> Herkamire - my understanding is that the newer version works on Windows and Linux.
08:17:36 <cleverdra> HiPE claims to only work on Sparc and x86, though.
08:20:17 --- quit: thin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
08:31:26 --- quit: XeF4 ("pois")
08:36:08 --- join: thin (thin@h24-64-175-61.cg.shawcable.net) joined #forth
08:50:12 --- join: tathi (~josh@wsip68-15-54-54.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth
08:52:01 --- quit: tathi (Client Quit)
08:55:04 <Herkamire> I have a PPC. looks like the one at erlang.org works for PPC. I asume it's not native though.
08:55:15 --- quit: Herkamire ("gotta run")
08:59:50 --- quit: thin ("bye")
09:05:26 --- join: proteus (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
09:05:27 --- quit: yeahright (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
09:15:10 --- quit: cleverdra (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
09:46:13 --- join: cleverdra (julianf@0-2pool111-31.nas2.florence1.sc.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth
10:03:47 --- join: I440r (~mark4@1Cust114.tnt1.bloomington.in.da.uu.net) joined #forth
10:04:25 --- quit: proteus (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
10:04:43 --- join: proteus (~proteusgu@24-197-147-197.charterga.net) joined #forth
10:30:21 --- quit: proteus ("Client Exiting")
10:42:50 --- join: XeF4 (theriolatr@12-245-111-146.client.attbi.com) joined #forth
11:36:35 --- quit: XeF4 ("pois")
12:34:14 --- join: jamc (~dne@as3-6-8.asp.s.bonet.se) joined #forth
12:54:39 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
13:01:18 --- quit: cleverdra ("Leaving")
13:34:18 --- join: I440r_ (~mark4@1Cust237.tnt2.bloomington.in.da.uu.net) joined #forth
13:51:27 --- quit: I440r (No route to host)
13:55:43 --- join: scottj (~scott@nod.to) joined #forth
14:01:02 <scottj> ok, so where should I look to figure out what the deal is w/ all you forthers?
14:01:08 <scottj> why it's cool and such
14:09:43 <I440r_> eh 
14:09:46 <I440r_> oh
14:09:48 <I440r_> hmm
14:09:53 <I440r_> well here is a good start :)
14:09:59 <I440r_> sometimes the channel is a bit dead tho
14:10:17 <I440r_> you should google for forth and read anything you find by chuck moore or jeff fox
14:10:28 <I440r_> download a good forth and mess arround in the sources 
14:10:30 <I440r_> do you code asm ?
14:10:56 <scottj> nope
14:11:22 <I440r_> well asm coding isnt required but it makes it easier to understand how various forth words work
14:11:35 <I440r_> go to your library and look for leo brodies book "starting forth"
14:11:39 <I440r_> if its there read it
14:11:45 <I440r_> its a bit old but it will get you started
14:13:37 <scottj> I don't really want to learn forth
14:13:48 <scottj> I only want to know why so many people are so crazy about it
14:14:03 <I440r_> aha
14:14:03 <I440r_> well
14:14:20 <I440r_> development in forth is orders of magnitude faster than any other language
14:14:26 <I440r_> forth is very simple
14:14:47 <I440r_> compiled forth is 50% the size of the equiv asm and 100* smaller than the equiv c
14:15:08 <I440r_> forth is extensible
14:15:19 <I440r_> if its not part of the language you can MAKE IT part of the language
14:15:30 <I440r_> forth is fast
14:15:37 <I440r_> forth compiles in the blink of an eye
14:15:48 <I440r_> my compiler compiles over a megabyte of source code PER SECOND
14:15:49 <I440r_> ish
14:16:14 <I440r_> is that enought to convince you ?? :) heh
14:17:29 --- join: tcn (tcn@tc4-login33.megatrondata.com) joined #forth
14:17:39 <I440r_> tcn :)
14:17:44 <I440r_> im bored
14:17:49 <tcn> me too
14:17:50 <I440r_> ive not touched isforth in almost a week
14:18:19 <tcn> i worked almost full time this week
14:18:53 <tcn> it's getting busy
14:19:32 * I440r_ needs a job
14:20:13 <scottj> how fast is forth compiled code?
14:20:23 <I440r_> runs at close to asm speed
14:20:37 <scottj> is gforth a good forth compiler?
14:20:47 <tcn> no but it is fast
14:20:51 <I440r_> there are some compilers that optimize and can compete with the best optimizing c compilers but im against compiler optimizations
14:21:06 <I440r_> well, its written in c so i dont like it but im not going to badmouth it
14:21:14 <I440r_> my compiler is written in assembler and forth
14:21:27 <scottj> just curious why forth doesn't do better in doug bayley's language shootout
14:21:35 <tcn> gforth is pretty complicated for such a plain-looking forth
14:21:49 <I440r_> forth never wins against the likes of c
14:21:55 <I440r_> forth will never be universally accepted
14:22:02 <I440r_> because of one small flaw in forth
14:22:11 <I440r_> forth makes every other language look MORONIC
14:22:25 <tcn> and it has limited uses
14:22:30 <I440r_> so everyone who loves their pet language tends to hate forth
14:22:32 <scottj> this isn't about this
14:22:39 <I440r_> forth has NO limitations what so ever
14:22:54 <I440r_> except the limitations of teh person coding it
14:23:14 <tcn> right, you could write a C compiler in Forth, but why not just write it in C :)
14:23:30 <scottj> http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/lang/gforth/
14:25:06 <I440r_> ugh, benchmarks are all so contrived
14:25:40 <scottj> so we should just take it on faith that forth is faster, smaller, and better than everything else?
14:25:51 <tcn> heh, how is "hello world" a benchmark?
14:26:01 <scottj> that's one of two dozen
14:26:22 <I440r_> scottj forth is more space efficient than c.
14:26:27 <I440r_> you write application X in c
14:26:31 <I440r_> ill write it in forth
14:26:41 <I440r_> what takes you 3 years to accomplish will be finished in forth in 3 weeks
14:27:00 <tcn> gcc & gforth are both crap
14:27:07 <I440r_> your compiled executable will be 50 megs in size
14:27:14 <I440r_> mine will be 30 or 40 k
14:27:17 <tcn> you should see a real C compiler
14:27:30 <scottj> tcn, you mean the kind that nobody uses? :)
14:27:32 <I440r_> yours will be ful of bugs
14:27:38 <I440r_> mine will be alot mroe stable
14:28:07 <I440r_> not bug free... but ill have a hell of alot less bugs
14:28:36 <scottj> does forth havea  GC?
14:28:42 <I440r_> gc 
14:28:44 <I440r_> ?
14:28:49 <scottj> garbage collector
14:28:50 <I440r_> it doesnt need it
14:29:03 <I440r_> garbage collection is for compilers that are full of garbage :)
14:29:11 <I440r_> lol
14:29:22 <I440r_> seriously tho, forht does NOT need any sort of garbage collection
14:29:31 <I440r_> tho there have been pepole who have added it
14:29:41 <I440r_> if you WANT gc you can ADD it
14:30:17 <I440r_> and i dont mean you can create a library to be linked to your executable by the compiler 
14:30:23 <scottj> then what is it about forth that is going to make your code more bug free than my C?
14:30:26 <I440r_> i mean you can ADD garbage collection TO forth directly
14:30:32 <I440r_> ok
14:30:44 <I440r_> lets look at a typical development cycle for a c application
14:30:48 <I440r_> run editor
14:30:52 <I440r_> write entire program
14:30:54 <I440r_> run compiler
14:30:56 <I440r_> run linker
14:30:59 <I440r_> run debugger
14:31:05 <I440r_> edit compile link debug repeat
14:31:08 <I440r_> over and over and over
14:31:13 <I440r_> till you get it sort of right
14:31:18 <I440r_> in forth you do this
14:31:27 <I440r_> you write a word (a function)
14:31:31 <I440r_> : blah xxx yyy zzz ;
14:31:37 <I440r_> that word is now part of your forth
14:31:41 <I440r_> you can TEST it right now
14:31:45 <I440r_> 10 20 30 blah
14:31:55 <I440r_> you passed parameters to it, you can now test the results
14:32:03 <I440r_> if its wront you can fix it NOW
14:32:03 <scottj> I'm familiar with interactive languages
14:32:36 <scottj> is that the only thing?
14:32:40 <I440r_> well, at each stage of development of a forth program EVEYTHING ELSE has already been fully tested
14:32:54 <scottj> only if you tested it
14:33:03 <I440r_> a good forth coder always tests
14:33:11 <I440r_> forth encourages proper factorying
14:33:13 <scottj> any good coder would test
14:33:14 <I440r_> non of this...
14:33:19 <I440r_> int foo (void)
14:33:20 <I440r_> {
14:33:24 <I440r_>   5 thousand lines of code
14:33:25 <I440r_> }
14:33:34 <I440r_> nested to the umpttenth level
14:33:45 <scottj> how does forth encourage that?
14:33:50 <I440r_> forth encourages you to factor you code right down to the absolute minmum
14:33:58 <I440r_> because theres almost NO overhead for nesting
14:34:03 <I440r_> look at c again
14:34:10 <I440r_> push parameter
14:34:11 <I440r_> push parameter
14:34:11 <I440r_> push parameter
14:34:13 <I440r_> call function
14:34:17 <I440r_> open local stack fram
14:34:19 <I440r_> do function
14:34:23 <I440r_> clean local stack fram
14:34:28 <I440r_> return ONE ITEM
14:34:32 <I440r_> clean parameters off stack
14:34:35 <I440r_> in forth
14:34:38 <I440r_> push parametes
14:34:42 <I440r_> call word
14:34:49 <I440r_> return any number of values
14:35:10 <I440r_> the overhead for nesting into a forth word is next to nothing
14:35:31 <I440r_> forth teaches you to factor your code properly
14:35:40 <I440r_> properly factored code is a hell of alot easier to debug
14:35:48 * Robert can't factor. Hooray for him.
14:35:49 <I440r_> because your not debugging 50 thousand lines of code in one go
14:36:04 <I440r_> your degugging 40 thousand 3 or 4 lines functions
14:36:05 <scottj> ok, anything else?
14:36:14 <I440r_> im sure there is heh
14:36:26 <I440r_> can i ask why your asking all this ?
14:36:35 <I440r_> if you arent realy interested in learning forth ?
14:36:38 <scottj> well, so far I don't consider your 2 reasons all that convincing
14:36:49 <I440r_> thers more than two resons
14:36:57 <I440r_> ill tell you what
14:36:57 <scottj> I just want to know why so many people love it so much
14:37:00 <I440r_> a challenge :)
14:37:06 <I440r_> learn forth. ALL of it
14:37:15 <I440r_> learn enough forth to be able to create your own compiler
14:37:27 <I440r_> and then you will understand why forth makes other languages look MORONIC
14:37:43 <I440r_> very few c coders ever write their own c compiler
14:37:44 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth
14:38:03 <I440r_> almost every single forht coder either creates their own 100% from scratch compiler (like im doing)
14:38:10 <I440r_> or they modify someone elses
14:38:25 <Robert> Or they let I440r_ for their work, like I do.
14:38:32 <I440r_> lol
14:38:39 <I440r_> your just a lazy bastard :P
14:38:59 <I440r_> scottj have you ever heard of a microprocessor being microcoded in c?
14:39:09 <I440r_> there was one, i think jeff fox mentioned it a while back
14:39:15 <I440r_> cost intel 50 billion to develop or something
14:39:32 <I440r_> chuck moore and jeff fox both produce chips that are microcoded in forth
14:39:47 <Kitanin> Yeah, but Intel's got enough brainwashed consumers they can afford that.  :-)
14:39:54 <I440r_> lol ya :P
14:39:57 <I440r_> wait
14:40:06 <I440r_> i like intel microcontrolers :P
14:40:10 <I440r_> just not their processors heh
14:40:14 <Robert> I440r_: Well, I coded a forth once :P A quick job in asm, just to learn the basics of Forth.
14:40:16 * Kitanin explains the MHz myth to his boss for the fifth time this week...
14:40:18 <Robert> Anyway, bbl
14:40:32 <jamc> I440r_: uhm what? chucks chips aren't microcoded
14:40:51 <I440r_> yes they are
14:40:55 <I440r_> you HAVE to have microcode 
14:41:04 <Kitanin> Hey, if we built a computer out of their microcontrollers, could we stick an ``Intel Inside'' sticker on it?  :-)
14:41:05 <I440r_> the chips are forth engines
14:41:12 <I440r_> lol
14:41:21 <jamc> then you've got an alternative definition of microcode
14:41:26 <I440r_> i want an intel outside sticker:P
14:42:07 <Kitanin> I want one of those 65,536 processor 6502 thingies from the eighties...  :-D
14:42:29 <Kitanin> Connection Machine?
14:42:44 <scottj> yeah
14:43:17 * Kitanin wonders how scottj timed that perfectly with the Barnes & Barnes CD he's listening to...
14:43:36 <Kitanin> http://mission.base.com/tamiko/cm/cm-image.html
14:43:38 <scottj> I'm good :)
14:43:46 <Kitanin> Yeah...  That's the shiznit...
14:44:01 <scottj> Thinking Machines!
14:44:12 <scottj> I was trying to remember the name of the company and kept thinking Think Inc. :)
14:44:18 <scottj> damn Monsters Inc :)
14:45:04 <scottj> did you know Richard Feynman worked on that?
14:45:25 <I440r_> scottj so are u gona learn forth?
14:45:27 <I440r_> :)
14:46:13 <scottj> not sure yet
14:46:22 <scottj> sounds like it's mostly for low level stuff
14:46:27 <scottj> which I'm totally uninterested in
14:46:38 <I440r_> not totally
14:46:44 <I440r_> c is also low level if you want it to be
14:46:52 <I440r_> forth however can go as high level as ada and beyond
14:50:03 <tcn> hey those benchmarks are interesting. 'Hello world' in java used over 8M of memory
14:50:32 * Kitanin boggles at the fact that the CM-5 consisted of 16,384 40MHz SPARCS...
14:51:01 <scottj> so is there a website where I can find lots of forth snippets?
14:51:26 <scottj> I just thought of a small app I need to write which is mostly just calling an external unix command but still might make a good beginner app in forth
14:53:01 <tcn> so who built the CM's? students?
14:53:17 <I440r_> well you could download isforth heh - www.forth.org, ftp.taygeta.org are good places 
14:55:10 <Kitanin> tcn: No, it was Thinking Machines Corporation.  Sadly, there wasn't a market for tens of thousands of 6502's anymore, so they Chapter 11ed in 1993.
14:55:59 <tcn> hehe
14:56:21 <Kitanin> They're now apparently absorbed into Oracle.  :-P
14:58:38 <tcn> heh.. gcc outperformed all the LISP derived languages on list operations
14:59:55 <Kitanin> tcn: What benchmarks?
15:00:18 --- quit: jamc ("[x]chat")
15:01:36 <scottj> doug baley's language shootout
15:01:46 <scottj> bayley
15:06:20 <I440r_> doggie walk time
15:06:21 <I440r_> brb
15:09:11 <Kitanin> scottj: bagley.
15:09:35 <scottj> thanks :)
15:11:49 <Kitanin> Yeesh.  Could you have picked a benchmark _less_ appropriate for LISPoids?  No wonder they sucked.  :-)
15:16:45 <tcn> hmm.. Ocaml is the only other language that's competitive w/ C
15:16:57 <tcn> but the code is fucking ugly
15:17:44 <tcn> it has less lines of code than any other language, but those lines are LONG :)
15:25:03 --- quit: Klaw (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
15:25:46 <Robert> Good evening, gentlemen.
15:27:09 <tcn> hi
15:27:37 * Robert is playing with the new IsForth.
15:47:26 --- quit: tcn ()
17:08:15 --- part: scottj left #forth
18:35:24 --- join: TheBlueWizard (TheBlueWiz@ip-216-25-205-189.vienna.va.fcc.net) joined #forth
18:35:34 <TheBlueWizard> hiya all
18:38:54 <I440r_> hi:)
18:38:58 <I440r_> i gtg to store
18:39:09 <I440r_> soon as my dad gets off the shitter and gives me my car keys :P
18:39:20 <TheBlueWizard> hiya I440r_!!! :)
18:39:28 <TheBlueWizard> shitter?
18:39:36 <I440r_> :)
18:39:52 <TheBlueWizard> what's a shitter?
18:41:04 <TheBlueWizard> anyway, I opened my PC, jiggled the cables on the CD drive, and turned it on...this time everything seems to be fine.  I haven't inserted the Debian CD yet hehe
19:40:46 --- quit: I440r_ (No route to host)
19:40:49 <TheBlueWizard> gotta go...bye all
19:40:59 --- part: TheBlueWizard left #forth
20:02:17 --- quit: skylan ("Reconnecting")
20:02:18 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
20:02:24 --- join: skylan (sjh@Sprint3022.tbaytel.net) joined #forth
20:22:43 --- join: I440r (~mark4@1Cust131.tnt1.bloomington.in.da.uu.net) joined #forth
20:46:17 --- join: tathi (~josh@ip68-9-59-251.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth
20:52:09 --- quit: tathi ("leaving")
21:06:04 --- nick: Fractal -> {
21:06:15 --- nick: { -> _]Fr4[
21:07:55 --- nick: _]Fr4[ -> Fractal
21:41:03 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth
21:50:03 --- join: Klaw (~chuck@ip68-96-75-80.oc.oc.cox.net) joined #forth
22:10:52 --- quit: Klaw ("upchuck")
22:10:52 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
22:16:36 --- join: Klaw` (~chuck@ip68-96-75-80.oc.oc.cox.net) joined #forth
22:27:26 --- quit: sif (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
22:39:15 --- join: Soap` (~flop@202-0-42-22.cable.paradise.net.nz) joined #forth
23:27:11 --- quit: I440r ("Reality Strikes Again!")
23:37:57 --- join: aleph0 (aleph0@lim-gw-01-213245109089.chello.fr) joined #forth
23:45:42 <aleph0> Hello, I'm looking for information about a Forth witch deal with a stack of objects instead of a stack of numbers. The words are polymorphics : the result depand of the type of the object in the stack.
23:50:06 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth
23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/02.09.13