00:00:00 --- log: started forth/02.11.10 02:15:40 --- quit: Robert (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:15:40 --- quit: skylan (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:15:40 --- quit: onetom (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:15:40 --- quit: ChanServ (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:15:40 --- quit: Grant (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:15:40 --- quit: TreyB (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:15:40 --- quit: OrngeTide (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:15:40 --- quit: Herkamire (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:15:40 --- quit: ianni (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:23:19 --- join: ianni (ian@inpuj.net) joined #forth 02:23:19 --- quit: ianni (benford.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 02:23:19 --- join: ianni (ian@inpuj.net) joined #forth 02:23:27 --- join: Robert (~Robert@robost86.tsps1.freenet6.net) joined #forth 02:23:27 --- join: skylan (sjh@Rockcliffe94.tbaytel.net) joined #forth 02:23:38 --- join: ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) joined #forth 02:23:38 --- join: Grant (~pyromania@dialup-236.128.221.203.acc02-high-pen.comindico.com.au) joined #forth 02:23:38 --- join: onetom (~tom@novtan.bio.u-szeged.hu) joined #forth 02:23:38 --- join: Herkamire (~jason@ip68-9-70-59.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth 02:23:38 --- join: TreyB (~trey@cpe-66-87-192-27.tx.sprintbbd.net) joined #forth 02:23:38 --- join: OrngeTide (orange@65.19.141.250) joined #forth 02:23:38 --- mode: benford.freenode.net set +o ChanServ 02:23:45 --- join: pyromania (~pyromania@dialup-117.158.220.203.acc01-high-pen.comindico.com.au) joined #forth 02:23:45 --- quit: Grant (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)) 02:23:57 --- nick: pyromania -> Grant 04:46:37 --- quit: Grant (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)) 06:28:44 --- join: pyromania (~pyromania@dialup-148.129.221.203.acc02-high-pen.comindico.com.au) joined #forth 08:31:30 --- join: thin (thin@h68-146-166-145.cg.shawcable.net) joined #forth 08:32:48 robert: you should install a fingerprint identification system to your bedroom using the AVR ;) 08:36:22 --- quit: thin (Client Quit) 09:37:27 --- join: Serg_penguin (wegrg@host197.image.ru) joined #forth 09:37:34 hi 09:38:03 --- join: neobrat (neobrat@0-1pool78-81.nas6.salt-lake-city1.ut.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 09:39:16 Hi Serg_penguin 09:39:24 Kak ty? 09:39:50 horosho 09:40:41 howdy all? 09:43:51 I just wrote a "hello world" program for my VM running on an AVR microcontroller :) 09:43:56 Worked fine. 09:44:13 gratz! :) 09:46:37 Thanks. 09:47:23 i hate being on hold w/ tech support of ANY kind *sigh* 10:07:51 MSN tech support blows 10:08:07 Thats what I get for living in BFE Utah 10:13:30 * Robert lives in a very small town in Sweden. 10:22:01 --- quit: neobrat (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)) 10:43:50 --- quit: Serg_penguin () 10:52:31 --- quit: pyromania (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 11:16:34 --- join: thin (thin@h68-146-166-145.cg.shawcable.net) joined #forth 11:17:02 --- join: XeF4 (xef4@lowfidelity.org) joined #forth 11:17:06 hi xef5 11:17:47 * XeF4 explodes in a blinding flash of instability.. that's xef4 to you. 11:18:06 i'm writing a bit of an intro to forth, but it's kinda tricky :( 11:20:19 hard!!! 11:20:29 okay 11:20:34 here's what i've got so far 11:21:01 What is forth? 11:21:01 Forth is a tool. It is a program that has an interpreter and a compiler. It comes with a programming language also called Forth, which enables the user to extend the program and it's language. 11:21:58 its language 11:22:07 no it isn't 11:22:10 heh 11:22:24 it's a language ontop of a program 11:22:32 forth is a programming language 11:22:32 both are called forth indiscriminately 11:22:37 I mean there is no apostrophe in the posessive 'its' 11:22:51 er 11:22:51 yeah 11:23:01 that's right 11:23:03 heh :) 11:25:12 hm.. because of existing stereotypes "an interpreter and a compiler" sounds like 2 hideously complex parallel implementations in the same environment.. 11:25:31 heh 11:25:45 the whole thing is tricky and i really don't like my writing style 11:25:54 i don't think my writing style is the easiest to read 11:26:17 and i don't think there's any point in writing unless it is easily readable 11:26:45 maybe i should say something about it being a TIL (threaded interpreted language) ?? 11:30:10 it isn't always a TIL 11:30:33 what about making it as an interactive tutorial? 11:30:46 oooh :) 11:31:33 eg.. if you want to show how compilation works, you explain it, have the user enter a colon definition, then dump the compiled def he just created 11:31:45 this tutorial is for the website 11:34:48 i am trying to explain forth in an alternative way 11:35:03 because there's too much preconceived notions about programming languages and crap 11:35:31 so that is why I'm saying right off that forth is a tool, a program that has an inbuilt programming language 11:37:04 also, i'm thinking that i should say something like: 11:38:23 forth is a niche tool and has been evolved for chuck moore's philosophy. forth and the philosophy are so closely entwined that forth is useless without the philosophy 11:39:19 * XeF4 gets mental image of monks spending their entire lives attaining Chuck Mooreness 11:39:48 what i'm saying is probably controversial ;) 11:40:10 you _intended_ that? =D 11:43:28 yep 11:43:59 it'll only be controversial to the forthers 11:44:02 not to the newbies 11:44:07 because they won't know ;) 11:44:10 er 11:44:18 they won't know enough about forth 11:47:31 What is forth? 11:47:31 Forth is a tool. It is a program that behaves like an interpreter but compiles code. It comes with a built-in programming language, also called Forth, which enables the user to extend the program and its language. 11:47:31 The interpreter is useful because it makes the language interactive, and lets you quickly test your code (remember Qbasic?). However, the code is compiled for speed and compactness. 11:47:31 Forth is a particularly unique tool. It has been created and evolved specifically for chuck moore's philosophy. Forth and the philosophy are so closely entwined that Forth's power as a tool is most evident when one follows the philosophy. 11:48:24 any comments? constructive criticism? 11:48:26 feedback? 11:51:19 Hi there. 11:51:38 hey rob 11:52:27 robert: what do you think of the intro? any ideas? 11:52:59 Looks fine. 11:53:26 I assume you write alot about Chucks philosophy after that. 11:53:38 thin: sounds good, except that Qbasic had all sorts of bizarre rules to hinder quick interactive testing 11:53:52 robert: yep 11:54:05 xef4: well i wanted an example or something.. 11:54:26 qbasic had f5 or it was f9 11:54:31 you just hit it and it ran the code 11:54:38 but that's not really interactive i guess 11:54:43 cause any ide can do that 11:55:14 robert: i'm having trouble with chuck's philosophy heh.. what's his philosophy? 11:55:24 ruthlessly simplify? factor? etc? 11:55:27 --- join: pnkfelix (~chatzilla@ip68-6-65-196.sb.sd.cox.net) joined #forth 11:55:43 isn't factoring more related to forth coding methodology than chuck's philosophy? 11:55:48 hello pinkfelix 11:55:56 Simplify the problem, don't implement more than neccesary, don't do too many abstraction layers. 11:56:06 And of course, factor, factor, factor. 11:56:08 thin: Keep It Simple, Smartarsesystemimplementor 11:56:36 what the.. 11:56:41 * XeF4 must not be well 11:56:51 I saw 'tcn' in place of 'thin' until about 20sec ago 11:57:11 interesting, you thought i was tcn the whole time? 11:57:15 yes 11:57:16 --- join: galexand (~galexand@adsl-78-220-129.rdu.bellsouth.net) joined #forth 11:57:17 must've explained why you were nicer to me ;) 11:57:22 hi galexand :) 11:57:26 hi thin 11:57:27 Haha. 11:57:28 hi hi 11:57:31 Hi galexand. 11:57:44 i am reading what looks like an indirect threaded forth orngetide sent me :) 11:58:06 For what platform? 11:58:10 xef4: thanks for being nice to me, while it lasted ;) 11:58:13 C 12:04:20 --- join: pyromania (~pyromania@dialup-7.158.220.203.acc01-high-pen.comindico.com.au) joined #forth 12:08:58 pyromania: have you learnt C yet? 12:09:15 er 12:09:21 wrong person 12:10:02 lol 12:10:05 :P 12:10:35 Does everybody know its mark birthday Tomororw (Today here cause im in Australia) 12:11:38 What is forth? 12:11:39 Forth is a tool invented by Chuck Moore. It is a program that behaves like an interpreter but compiles code. It comes with a built-in programming language, also called Forth, which enables the user to extend the program and its language. 12:11:39 The interpreter is useful because it makes the language interactive, and lets you quickly test and debug your code in small units. However, the code is compiled for speed and compactness. 12:11:40 Forth is a particularly unique tool. It was created as a direct result of Chuck Moore's philosophy. It is a supporting tool for that philosophy. Forth's potential arises when one uses the philosophy for coding, because Forth and the philosophy are so closely entwined. 12:11:44 Chuck Moore's philosophy is about simplicity and particularly about simplifying the problem one is faced with. Many coders just attempt to solve the problem directly, but with some careful thought, a much simpler implementation can be found which runs faster and saves memory. 12:11:48 Perhaps you have heard of people saying that X programming language lends itself to a particular job. That is, it is well suited for a particular problem. Forth however, lends itself to simplifying the problem. 12:11:53 --- mode: ChanServ set +o thin 12:12:02 woah brother 12:12:05 heh 12:12:42 any feedback? 12:12:44 i' 12:12:48 i'm writing an intro to forth 12:13:06 Write more! 12:13:19 robert: be more specific ? 12:13:26 More! More! 12:13:28 thin Nice.... 12:13:29 Oh. 12:13:29 :) 12:13:30 heh 12:13:34 Understandable 12:13:36 Well, nevermind me. 12:13:44 since i dont even know how to code forth 12:13:50 Just write a good Forth book. 12:13:57 robert: there will be some more material added 12:14:05 i'm emailing chuck moore the intro for some feedback :) 12:14:20 wait, you're writing a book about forth, and you don't know how to code forth? 12:14:58 thin: Hehe :) 12:15:05 what languages do you know? I think that's my biggest beef with a lot of forth advocacy; it seems like the people saying it aren't familiar with anything besides C and Assembly, from some of the things that the advocacy claims... 12:15:11 lol 12:15:40 I said i dont know how to code forth 12:15:41 not him 12:15:42 lol 12:15:44 * pnkfelix admits up front that he doesn't code in forth, but he's trying to learn 12:15:59 oh oh oh. whoops that was quite a mixup 12:16:18 pnkfelix: did my introduction sound arrogant or anything? i was trying to avoid that 12:16:47 er 12:16:51 heh 12:16:55 thin so you are making a tutorial? 12:17:03 nope, not at the moment 12:17:04 yes? 12:17:07 just an introduction at first 12:17:12 oh ok 12:17:20 i'm working on a website for this channel 12:17:21 is forth worth learning? 12:17:26 or is other languages more important at first 12:17:42 'important'? 12:17:43 pyromania: it might be helpful to learn assembler before forth 12:17:54 hehe 12:17:59 oh crikeys 12:18:01 pyro: might be hard to get an unbiased answer from here, but.. Forth is worth learning. 12:18:24 heh i have honestly never of heard of anyone using it in the IT Industry. 12:18:30 pyromania: i like to think that forth is a good language to learn, even if you don't use it, it changes your approach to coding. it also helps if you agree with the philosophy 12:18:32 Like im not trying to knock it or nothing but im just saying..... 12:18:47 ohhh i see thin.... =) 12:18:57 pyromania: from what I've heard, it gets a lot of play when you're dealing with embedded systems 12:19:08 interesting 12:19:10 pyromania: not that many people code in it, it's kinda weird and most people don't really care for the philosophy 12:19:16 Did mark end up finishing his compiler? 12:19:23 every Apple machine starts up with Forth first, in the OpenFirmware 12:19:29 heh cause there dickheads. 12:19:31 pyromania: IsForth? 12:19:39 pyromania: his compiler is still it work, but it's come a long ways 12:19:40 Yeah.... 12:19:47 It's on its way :) 12:19:48 it has sockets support 12:19:54 Nice 12:19:58 and he's coded a channel bot in it 12:20:03 I added that :P But then Mark released his code. 12:20:03 nice nice 12:20:07 soon he will code a web browser and take over the world 12:20:12 lol 12:20:15 Hehe. 12:20:23 Mark's a good guy and deserves alot.... 12:20:40 Very smart person up top.... 12:21:28 So where is a good place to start learning Assembly 12:21:37 i find it very hard to find tutorials... etc 12:21:53 pyromania: what languages do you know? And what is your goal in trying to learn a new one? (Is it for the job market, or personal growth, etc...?) 12:22:10 pnkfelix i dont "Technicly" no any. 12:22:17 Im still at school mate in my last year of High School 12:22:26 Our school coarses are pathetic in Australia 12:22:31 they teach us Visual Basic 12:22:39 Which is a load of crape. 12:22:41 ...well... I don't think I'd recommend assembly in that case, personally 12:22:52 pyro: just a moment, had a url for a good ASM tutorial here somewhere 12:22:53 We get to "learn" some C++ here. 12:23:36 heh 12:23:39 pyromania: it is probably worth learning eventually (depending on what area you work in), but I personally think that there are gentler introductions to programming than Assembly... 12:23:43 I cant understand how you guys learn so easy..... 12:24:06 learn what so easily? 12:24:07 :) 12:24:12 lol 12:24:13 pyromania: the first few languages you learn have a steep learning curve. but they get easier to learn as you learn more and more. 12:24:27 Well, I'm a quick learner. After only 5 years of 8 hours a day of coding, I've learnt to write simple programs. 12:24:36 LOL 12:24:49 ohly 5 year of 8 hours 12:24:49 lol 12:24:53 * pyromania slaps himself in the head. 12:25:53 heh You know what i like about you guys, you's are stuckup pricks like alot of people are.. 12:25:56 pyromania: if you decide to learn assembly, i strongly recommend "Assembly Language Step-by-Step" by Jeff Duntemann. I went through 8 assembly books including "Art of Assembly" before encountering this book, which was BLISS to read incomparison to the other books 12:26:07 er 12:26:14 There like im so smart and blah blah blah and never get over themselves cause there at a too higher of a standad. 12:26:14 s/incomparison/in comparison 12:26:19 standard rather. 12:26:26 thin: what do you think of 'Art of Assembly'? I happen to be tarring it up just now for pyro 12:27:07 pyromania: keep Forth open in your mind, because it probably will be worthwhile for you to learn it while you are still fresh and untainted (unlike me...) 12:27:23 hehe ok 12:27:52 xef4: well the book i just recommended was very very very easy to read, the information just flowed into my brain with minimal resistance. Art of Assembly is so-so, it's not as great as the book, particularly because the book does a great job of explaining computer internals and giving a solid background for begining to program in assembly 12:27:54 pyromania: but for starting off, I think I'd recommend that you play with: Smalltalk (download the Squeak environment), Scheme (download the DrScheme environment) and C (or Java, if you like...) 12:28:43 pyromania: unfortunately, as far as recommending tutorials... well, the only one I can say without reservation is for C 12:28:59 heh ok... 12:29:07 pyromania: how much do you know about coding? 12:29:22 hrm well at school it's not so much about learning Visual Basic 12:29:27 its learning the concepts of programming 12:29:29 :) 12:29:34 So that's pretty much what im doing 12:29:55 um, i wouldn't worry about the concepts of coding 12:29:59 lol 12:29:59 i never found them to help me ;) 12:30:00 pyromania: the book for C I recommend without reservation: "The C Programming Language", by Brian W Kernighan and Dennis M Ritchie 12:30:11 ok i know a shop that will have it 12:30:11 :) 12:30:34 Anyway guys n girls i have to head off to school. 12:30:35 =) 12:30:37 pyromania: the book that i mentioned "assembly language step-by-step" is actually written so that you don't need to know another programming language 12:30:38 Thank you for your help. 12:30:41 wait! 12:30:45 write down on a piece of paper 12:30:46 ok 12:30:48 ok 12:30:55 "Assembly language step-by-step" by jeff duntemann :p 12:30:58 :P 12:30:59 heh 12:31:09 it's truely great! 12:31:17 ok Saved 12:31:18 and it'll give you some programming concepts too 12:31:19 :) 12:31:26 :) 12:31:28 okay cool :) 12:31:37 Thanks guys n girls...... 12:31:38 :) 12:31:48 ooh girls 12:31:56 Well there may be girls in here 12:32:01 dont want to be sexist now do i 12:32:02 :P 12:32:10 i wish i had a better idea of what pyromania's goals are here. If it were just "learning how to write algorithms", any of these books would be just fine (well, or equally bad, since they don't really teach you much about algorithmic analysis) 12:32:24 heh 12:32:38 Later guys..... would luv to stay and talk but school starts kinda soon 12:32:38 heh 12:32:40 but if its to learn how to write an interactive graphic application, then I don't think C or Assembly is that great of a starting point 12:32:42 I don't even know what algorithmic analysis is. 12:33:01 That's how you get when you're 100% home-schooled with no books :P 12:33:07 Robert: like asympotic complexity? O(n), O(n^2), etc? 12:33:12 Well 12:33:24 I learned a bit about that from another document. 12:33:33 About cryptography. 12:33:42 Where I also learned some number theory ;) 12:34:28 nodnod. that's my point; the typical programming language intro's aren't going to talk about actually writing good algorithms; usually they only go as far as advising coding style for that particular language 12:34:57 * thin is reading Applied Cryptography 2nd edition 12:35:01 w.r.t. interactive graphic applications, where does Forth stand on that front? I mean, is it always pretty much, roll your own graphics library? 12:35:54 pnkfelix: let me paste the next part of the intro i'm working on :) 12:36:06 Why should you code in Forth? 12:36:07 If you expect Forth to come out of the box with all the fancy features of current day programming languages, such as garbage collection, OOP stuff like classes, etc, you'll be strongly disappointed. Lucky for you, Forth is readily extensible, and you have the flexibility to add new compiler/language features quite easily. 12:36:07 You might wonder why Forth doesn't come out of the box with mroe features, but that has to do with the philosophy. You code the features you need, when you need them. It is actually quite easy and fast to code the features you need, so it is not something that will slow your 12:36:36 s/mroe/more 12:37:02 the next bit i explain why it's not a huge disadvantage :P 12:37:10 and more of an advantage 12:37:15 in particular because of the philosophy heh 12:37:31 What features does it have out-of-the box? Any at all? :) 12:37:56 robert: hmm, two stacks, the ability to read minds, and a goo producing machine 12:37:58 Robert: I think it has a dictionary out of the box. Oh, and a stack, if you're lucky. C: ) 12:41:18 pnkfelix: while forth is generally pretty minimal out of the box, there are implementations with a graphics "library" and other stuff.. 12:45:04 pnkfelix: how did you hear about forth? 12:45:29 thin: I've heard about it multiple times in different contexts. Originally there was a link off of advogato, I think 12:45:54 and then recently one of my friends has been pushing it hardcore at me, so I've been reading more about it (he lent me an old text on it...) 12:46:02 How about Forth compilers? They can choose to support small subsets of Forth. 12:46:15 I played with gforth, but I'm not sure if I'm really happy with that... 12:46:18 E.g. only "nop" instructions, or no instructions at all :P 12:48:54 pnkfelix: what's the name of the forth book? 12:49:16 thin: unfortunately I do not remember the name... 12:49:59 thin: I'd be able to recognize the cover if I saw it, but I'm not even sure if I'd recognize teh title if you said it to me... 12:50:42 well one of the best forth books is called Starting Forth by Leo Brodie 12:50:55 and there's cartoons in it to illustrate some of the concepts 12:51:03 lots of people liked the cartoons :) 13:06:51 layers: good or bad? 13:06:54 hmmmmmmmmmm 13:10:11 thin: in what context? 13:16:56 well you look at a typical pc running windows, and it has tons of layers 13:17:33 ...so you mean having windows on top of eachother? Overlapping windows, versus, say, emacs windows where they can't overlap? 13:18:05 no 13:18:15 i mean like asm -> c -> windows -> user 13:18:18 so you mean abstraction layers then? 13:18:19 except there's more layers than that 13:19:13 you can't avoid having abstraction in any large system. People can't think about enough things at once to construct such systems without introducing abstractions somewhere, even if they're only conceptual abstractions... 13:19:43 (sorry, I should have said "you can't avoid having abstraction in any large CONSTRUCTED system"... evolved systems don't need abstraction. Yay nature) 13:20:57 heh :) 13:21:26 yeah there's generally always abstractions even on a conceptual level 13:21:33 conceptual layers are ok 13:21:35 :) 13:21:37 but then the question is, do you strongly *enforce* the abstraction. Like in your example above, windows is designed with the mindset that the typical user does NOT know C or assembly, but maybe they know (or want to know) how to modify the windows they see on their screen 13:22:35 its kind of like the information-hiding philosophy you see in languages like C++/Java, where the data-structure impl. is kept private, but the interface to using it is public 13:22:59 um, if you look at forth and what chuck moore is doing with it, he has been trying to reduce the layers between the computer and the user 13:23:22 he's even created the forthchips, which kinda removes the assembler layer out of the picture 13:23:27 as opposed to the information exposure philosophy you see in languages like Scheme or Forth, where any kind of abstraction enforcement is only by convention, not enforced by the language 13:23:38 it becomes seamlessly forth all the way from the assembler to the gui 13:23:45 I want the layers thin/transparent/unenforced enough that I can work at whatever level is right for the job. 13:25:13 actually, Scheme isn't a 100% correct example, because if you do tricky things with certain expressions, you can actually enforce abstraction boundaries. So forget I said that. Um, oh, but C doesn't enforce abstraction boundaries. Except for some weak enforcement at the file level with things like static variables... 13:26:06 pnk: it enforces abstraction of the machine quite well 13:26:27 XeF4: ...not when it lets you convert pointers to ints and back again 13:26:27 pnk: how do I manipulate the universally-implemented stack in ANSI C? 13:27:09 pnkfelix: i think xef4 meant C abstracts the machine pretty well.. i.e. you don't really think in machine lang when coding in C 13:27:14 XeF4: well, if we're talking about portable ANSI C, that's a different story. But Forth isn't portable, so why should we talk about portable C? 13:27:14 er 13:27:15 nevermind 13:27:16 ignore me 13:27:25 forth is portable 13:27:46 forth is more portable than C 13:28:07 thin: the impression that I've been given is that forth is less portable than C. But I guess that depends on what you want to do with it... 13:28:23 --- quit: galexand ("buh") 13:28:54 for example, you can implement a small simple forth implementation for multiple architectures quite easily. this kernel would be coded in assembly, but wouldn't be very big, maybe 1k or 2k. it depends on how simple you make the kernel. 13:28:58 then you can code for the kernel 13:29:09 and the code you have written is portable to all those kernels 13:29:11 so it's quite portable 13:29:27 yeah, but you just wrote your own kernel that you're porting yourself to different arch's 13:29:33 C is portable because someone else has already coded a C compiler for all the architectures 13:29:39 I've just implemented a machineForth-like interpreter for AVR (microcontroller). Took me a few hundred instructions. 13:29:49 pnk: name one C where I can do that without an external function written in asm 13:29:50 A C compiler is a huge work. 13:29:53 I could make the same argument for C, saying that I'll design my own portable library of routines that I'll port to different targets asa necessary 13:30:35 pnkfelix: it's quite easy to code a small forth kernel, and historically, forth has often been the first language coded for new architectures 13:30:57 XeF4: where you can do what? I didn't see your original example? Or are you talking about Robet's interpreter for AVR? 13:31:00 ...and "Hello world" programs the first programs. 13:31:15 That means "Hello, world!" is better than other programs! 13:31:17 it's very easy to understand the forth compiler and to keep the whole thing in your head, C compilers are much more complex 13:31:26 * Robert pokes thin 13:31:33 robert: yeah? 13:31:41 Oh, nevermind :) 13:31:55 pnk: where you can touch the C stack directly 13:31:59 robert: what you said seemed sarcastic but i didn't follow the logic 13:32:12 I'm not arguing that writing a C compiler is easy. I see your point though; I didn't mean to say that C the language was easy to port to other architectures, but rather that the CODE I write in C is just as portable as code I write in Forth 13:32:17 thin: Niether do I. Forget about it :) 13:32:40 thin: I just wanted to point out that it's of course natural that you implement the most simple thing first. 13:32:49 XeF4: you can take teh address of a local variable. Its not portable, but it will work with most compilers for most architectures 13:32:50 pnkfelix: well, i like to say that forth is more portable because it's easier to code a forth kernel for a new architecture because its so simple :) 13:32:55 thin: Without caring if it's useful or not ;) 13:33:12 how dare you say "hello world" isn't useful! 13:33:21 thin: Sorry, master. 13:33:26 heh 13:33:27 eww :P 13:33:30 --- join: I440r (~mark4@sdn-ap-008tnnashP0150.dialsprint.net) joined #forth 13:33:30 pnk: I can take the addresss of the first arg to get the second item on the stack (usually), but that is strictly read-only 13:33:33 Hey I440r 13:33:39 hi 13:33:39 hi hi hih i hih ihi hihihihiihiihihhihihihihiiiiii i440r! 13:33:50 who is it thats doing stuff with arm processors ? 13:33:52 i440r: i've written a really cool introduction 13:34:04 thin cool! 13:34:04 i440r: that was um... neobrat 13:34:11 XeF4: strictly read-only? As in you can't write to the stack through it? Since when? 13:34:12 yea - is his forth PD ? 13:34:26 --- join: tcn (tcn@tc2-login40.megatrondata.com) joined #forth 13:34:27 pnk: as in you can't change the stack and frame pointers 13:34:29 or available for use in a commercial app ? 13:34:32 i440r: yeah i think he was willing to send it to people who emailed him and asked for it 13:34:33 tcn! 13:34:37 hey 13:34:48 thin cool - actually tho, we would PAY for its use :) 13:34:59 XeF4: oh I see; you're not talking about modifying the stack memory, but rather on modifying the SP register? 13:35:00 but would prolly have to modify it alot :) 13:35:08 sp@ and sp! 13:35:21 i440r: yeah, he coded it for the gameboy and it doesn't have an interpreter 13:35:22 also isforth does alot of things like xcht ebx, [esip] 13:35:28 xchg even 13:35:33 i44or: we're talking about C, not Forth :) 13:35:46 thin xef4 aha - rotsa rukk :) 13:36:16 XeF4: okay, so that's an example of an abstraction of the machine that C wont' let you break: modification of the machine registers? 13:36:24 where can i get info on the arm instruction set and programming arm processors in assembler? 13:36:31 pnk: yes. 13:37:30 XeF4: but its not like Forth lets you do that either? You'd have to write your own assembly routine for that case too. (Except for teh stack-pointer, which we've already gone over) 13:38:17 l440r: intel's website has the ARM instruction set reference online. Is that what you're looking for, or something more tutorial oriented, or...? 13:38:44 pnk: true. I was just saying that C does "enforce abstraction boundaries" 13:38:55 Hi tcn :) 13:39:39 i need to learn arm assembler :) 13:39:45 XeF4: yes, that's true. There are some boundaries that any language is going to enforce, simply because to be able to get at all the capabilities of a processor, you need to use the asm for that processor. does that sound fair? 13:39:52 I440r: Why? 13:40:42 pnk: fair enough 13:40:49 because i can get work with my father. he wants to do a forth project on a gizmo using the arm processor 13:41:02 I440r: Neat :) 13:41:07 Good luck. 13:41:33 I440r: do you know what variant of the ARM you're workign with? StrongARM, for example? 13:41:35 I know a guy who's working with ARM. 13:42:00 * pnkfelix works on ARM compilers for a living 13:42:49 ive no idea. 13:43:11 pnkfelix: Nice. 13:43:23 pnkfelix: What languages? 13:43:57 I440r: http://www.lart.tudelft.nl/doc.php3 13:44:22 I440r: the above site might or might not have stuff useful to you... 13:44:28 Robert: C, C++, Fortran 13:44:57 Robert: We used to support Pascal. In fact, the compiler itself was written in Pascal up until a few years ago. 13:45:26 pnkfelix: What kind of people/companies use Fortran nowadays? 13:46:05 Robert: I dunno, I'm not in sales. Its not a hugely popular product, but we still need to support it for the people that do use it. 13:46:44 Okay. 13:46:50 Robert: I do know that a friend at UChicago may have to learn Fortran because all of the legacy code is written in Fortran and so all the new stuff usually is written in Fortran too (thats for their material sciences dept., dunno what division) 13:47:13 * Robert wouldn't write a C++ compiler for fun. 13:47:18 So my guess is that the biggest users of Fortran are legacy users. 13:47:26 Seems like an over-complex language. 13:47:30 Robert: no, C++ is definitely not fun. 13:47:52 * Robert pets Forth. 13:48:05 Robert: it is amazingly hard to get your code to even compile (at least on reasonably strict compilers) 13:48:30 --- join: thin_ (thin@h68-146-166-145.cg.shawcable.net) joined #forth 13:48:32 --- quit: thin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 13:48:39 woah 13:48:41 --- nick: thin_ -> thin 13:48:47 That's why I was careful to not advise C++ to pyromania earlier... 13:48:47 :) 13:48:53 Hehe. 13:49:17 plain C is decent if you understand pointers 13:49:36 And BASIC if you don't. 13:49:43 heh 13:49:56 pascal 13:50:14 I'd prefer Scheme/Smalltalk over BASIC. I feel like BASIC was so limiting when I learned it... but maybe I just didn't know what I was doing. C: ) 13:50:33 Hehe. 13:50:51 I've never used Scheme, but I'd like to learn a lispy language some day. 13:51:09 I went from BASIC to LOGO to Pascal to C 13:52:14 Each one kinda pissed me off until I got to C 13:52:36 i went from assembler to assembler to assembler to forth 13:52:37 to c 13:52:40 how would one do things like exceptions/continuations in Forth? 13:52:49 and c pisses me off every time i hear its name 13:52:51 :) 13:53:17 pnkfelix: what are continuations? 13:53:34 pnk: continuations are (almost) like values on the return stack 13:53:40 thin: they're like labels (for gotos) but with arguments. 13:53:50 hmm 13:54:04 pnk: put an address there and when a procedure returns, it will return to whatever you put there 13:54:05 i440r is a bad boy for implementing gotos in isforth 13:54:11 thin: they're most popular in the form of exceptions, in languages like C++/Java 13:54:40 : goto ( addy you want to go to -- ) >r ; 13:54:49 XeF4: ah. I should learn more about the return stack. I've only really gotten familiar with the Data Stack and the Control Stack 13:54:58 actually my code is wrong, but shhh! ;) 13:55:15 : goto r> swap >r >r ; 13:55:20 XeF4: but won't the return stack still have a slew of other return addresses waiting below the one you pushed there? 13:56:27 thin: actually, saying continuations are like labels is really misleading. Its more like they're a whole context (call-stack), that you can replace your current context with. 13:57:05 pnk: yes 13:57:31 pnk: but the param stack has a slew of other values waiting below the ones you care about, so at least it's consistent 13:57:54 aaah. 13:58:29 pnk: if you have rp! and rp@, you can of course replace your whole call stack easily enough 13:58:29 XeF4: hmmm. but for things like exceptions, you really want to kill off all of those intermediate addresses, because you're trying to jump over them and get back to the original context that the try-block was in 13:59:03 pnk: you can set a marker and then if an exception occurs, reset the stack pointer to the marker 13:59:11 XeF4: hmm. Okay, I'll give that some thought. That sounds like an expensive operation, unfortunately. But I guess that exceptions are expensive in most languages out there... 13:59:31 XeF4: oh oh, you're setting a marker fwith rp! and rp@? Hmm, okay, that sounds better. 13:59:34 pnk: which sounds expensive? 13:59:44 nono.. 14:00:20 you use rp! to unwind the stack in case of an exception 14:00:30 XeF4: never mind the "expensive" comment, I thought you were saying that I should use operations that stash the current stack away somewhere, and then later copy it back in. That sounded expensive to me. 14:00:46 that would be awful, yes. 14:00:53 pnkfelix: at first, forth feels very "hackish" because you do the stuff you want to do via a "hack" , like i thought it was very "hackish" to manipulate the return stack. but this is actually the way to code in forth 14:01:08 --- quit: thin ("brb") 14:01:12 XeF4: Yeah, sorry. I should learn what people are actually saying before I respond to it. C: ) 14:02:33 http://ficl.sourceforge.net/dpans/dpansa9.htm gives a nice hypothetical implementation 14:23:59 how can i do a for loop and get the index value in isforth? 14:24:07 i know theres some cool little word 14:24:09 i saw 14:24:10 a for loop ? 14:24:11 do r@ 14:24:16 ah 14:24:19 :) 14:24:25 : blah 10 for r@ . nxt ; 14:25:05 if im in here and i dont respond to a question you can message it to me, i notice messages quicker sometimes heh 14:25:29 the word "for" just compiles a >r anyway :) 14:25:32 i just hda typed that 14:25:40 or it might be an alias for it, i forget heh 14:31:38 hmmmm 14:31:44 i need something to write 14:31:50 memory management 14:37:22 such as ? 14:43:26 --- quit: tcn () 14:46:08 no idea 14:46:09 hha 15:00:49 --- join: joonas (jpihlaja@kruuna.helsinki.fi) joined #forth 15:01:01 Hi there. 15:01:05 * Robert goes to bed. 15:01:06 hello 15:01:07 Night all. 15:01:09 bye 15:01:12 night 15:01:43 what's the url for the #forth log gain? 15:01:56 gain -> again 15:02:02 Check ultratechnology.com 15:02:07 The link at the left 15:02:15 Then choose the right item in the list. 15:04:35 ok got it: http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/forth/02.11.10 15:08:57 * joonas goes to bed too 15:09:06 * joonas yawns 15:09:11 bye all! 15:09:20 --- quit: joonas ("ircII2.8.2-EPIC3.004+Kasi --- Bloatware at its finest.") 15:21:26 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@65.191.88.177) joined #forth 15:27:03 how cna I multi task in forth? 15:28:12 well 15:28:22 there are plenty of multi taskers written in forth 15:28:28 what they usually do is patch into pause 15:28:39 most of them are cooperative multi taskers 15:31:48 i see 15:32:02 i feel so belittled by all this code, it's great 15:33:28 heh :) you should work on mozilla ;) 15:33:41 LOL 15:33:43 ive seen their code, thanks 15:33:48 & no thanks ;D 15:33:57 i'd rather stare at forth 15:34:27 building mozilla requires about a GIG of diskspace 15:34:33 by all what code ? 15:34:52 mozilla is pretty fuckin huge 15:35:01 abstracted to say the least 15:35:25 obfuscated? 15:36:08 ;no 15:36:14 just so many libs and shit 15:36:18 like they use XUL for ex. 15:36:28 Herk: "only" ~350MB last night on FBSD 15:36:34 im not intimate with its source, but ive seen the massive amount of siht needed to buld it :) 15:36:49 xul is like specifying UI with XML 15:36:54 GUI that is 15:37:06 ... 15:37:06 jrjrj 15:38:52 ianni: the interesting "feature" that the mozilla guys claim results from this, is that users can contribute bugfixes by only hacking on XUL definitions; they don't need to download a full dev. env. 15:39:08 pnkfelix: HHAH 15:39:12 that's funny 15:39:28 like i can just edit xml and re-run mozilla? kewl! :) 15:39:30 heheh 15:44:13 how do I do modulus 15:44:39 devisionm 15:44:41 division 15:46:29 mod 15:46:54 and: /mod gives you the quotient and the modulus 15:48:20 heh :) 15:49:54 sweetnes 15:54:35 man, if only i could think in forth 15:55:02 one would be unstoppable :P 16:02:51 ianni exactly 16:02:56 you just goota learn! 16:08:27 : /mod / mod@ ; ( per own forth) 16:09:53 where mod@ is push eax ; mov eax,edx 16:30:20 --- quit: Herkamire ("leaving") 18:15:53 --- quit: pyromania (Connection timed out) 18:20:06 --- quit: pnkfelix ("ChatZilla 0.8.10 [Mozilla rv:1.2b/20021016]") 18:41:17 I440r yeah 18:41:48 i just gotta find something to truely motivate me to go through with learning it 19:39:33 --- join: Herkamire (~jason@ip68-9-70-59.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth 20:57:24 --- quit: Herkamire ("leaving") 21:13:31 --- join: pyromania (~pyromania@dialup-210.159.220.203.acc01-high-pen.comindico.com.au) joined #forth 21:42:28 --- join: Fractal (doug@asix12jpy55ej.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth 21:44:07 --- join: thin (~thin@h68-146-166-145.cg.shawcable.net) joined #forth 21:53:51 anybody alive 21:55:13 wakie wakie 21:55:14 Yo. 21:55:16 don't be shy 21:55:18 hi fractal :) 21:55:23 How's it going? 21:55:27 pretty good 21:55:44 hey i could use some feedback from you on my forth introduction 21:55:47 I'm reading the IRC interview with chuck.. 21:55:54 just a few secs, i'll put it up 21:55:57 Ok. On what topic in particular? 21:56:03 Ok, cool. 21:58:38 http://hermantom.homeip.net/~guest/forth/intro.txt 21:58:56 OK 22:01:14 BTW, tailor should be "taylor" 22:01:56 eh, no 22:02:00 i'm pretty sure it's "tailor" 22:02:00 But yeah, it looks good. 22:02:10 tailor as in tailoring a suit 22:02:17 pant tailor 22:02:37 Ok, ya tailor 22:02:42 fractal: how can i convince the reader that coding in forth is fast enough? :) 22:02:49 that's the last paragraph i'm on 22:04:23 Well, unfortunatley often it isn't. However, you can stress that simple, readily understood code is much easier to extend then complex, obscure code. 22:05:21 well how do we know forth is a slow language to code in? for example, i code really slow in forth 22:05:27 for the most part, i don't code 22:05:36 and the other part is that it's taken me awhile to become comfortable with forth 22:05:43 and i'm still shaky on data structures and crap 22:05:59 but that's also cause i've barely coded at all 22:06:07 Well, fortunatley forth doesn't provide data structures. :) 22:06:23 shaky on creating data structures :P 22:06:39 i don't think forth is slow to code in 22:06:48 but that's my instinct 22:07:14 i can't really argue it based on the interactiveness of forth because most people use editors 22:07:18 Well, the thing about forth is that it provides so little functionality in the system, in exchange for user added functionality. 22:07:25 unless i got around to coding my INTERACTIVE EDITOR :D 22:07:39 Heh. 22:08:39 the interactive editor combines the best of both, because one day i was sitting on my ass thinking "if interactiveness was one of the great features of forth, and we no longer use it fully, wtf?" 22:08:57 so i'm all "aha, we shall make an editor and it shall be interactive" 22:09:03 and lo behold earth was created 22:09:05 Well, one of the main arguments for forth programmer's increased productivity was that forth code could actually be written, compiled, and debugged on a target embedded system, where other systems (like embedded C) would require you to cross-compile for the target then copy it over via serial link or some such. 22:09:31 eh? 22:09:52 Actually, until recently, forth systems usually included an editor, but people seem to like external editors now-a-days. 22:10:18 fractal: yeah but the forths that i've tried out that came with an internal editor did not have an "interactive" editor 22:10:27 the interactive editor is my very unique and original idea afaik 22:10:38 Well, normally you can't fit a C compiler on an embedded target, but a forth system can often be made to fit. 22:10:45 Ok, cool. 22:11:22 the interactive editor goes like this. the top 70% of the screen is dedicated to the editor, and the bottom 30% is dedicated to the forth interpreter as we know it with the OK and all that 22:11:42 and the forth programmer codes using the interpreter 22:11:49 types up a word, tests it etc 22:12:02 and when it's good, he commits it to the editor 22:12:22 well, it probably would get stored to the editor in the first place 22:12:33 or something 22:12:34 I see. Split screen functionality does sound original. 22:12:35 but basically 22:13:02 the programmer should be able to work in the interpreter area and get the advantages of the interactiveness and being able to test his words 22:13:14 and yet it gets saved to the editor and can be easily manipulated 22:13:25 so there'll be an editor vocabulary and the editor display area 22:13:44 Yes, just like polyforth's editor. 22:13:50 Except with a split screen. 22:14:02 yeah i guess :) 22:14:06 do you have starting forth? 22:14:14 Yeah, somewhere... 22:14:19 A classic. 22:14:19 there's a line-based editor in that book i think 22:14:26 Yeah, that's polyforth's. 22:14:34 ahh that's right 22:15:35 Seriously, though, your article seems like a good start so far. 22:16:13 thanks :) 22:16:23 i'm pretty happy about it actually 22:16:35 i've been meaning to do an "official #forth website" 22:16:44 and i've been delaying on it because i wanted to write a good introduction 22:16:58 but it was quite tricky to think of a good way to approach explaining forth 22:17:06 but i just tried this morning and it came all together 22:17:07 Were you the guy who was going to port isforth to freebsd? 22:17:12 nope 22:17:18 Hmmm... 22:17:18 don't have freebsd 22:17:43 maybe you are thinking of tcn? 22:17:48 but tcn isn't going to 22:17:51 there was another guy 22:17:52 Hm, ya I'm not a big fan of freebsd myself. It's a linuxified x86-only BSD... 22:17:57 Maybe... 22:18:02 but i think he was a newish forther 22:18:43 well freebsd isn't that bad, it is apparently THE os to use for running servers 22:19:09 * thin doesn't have linux installed either for various dumb reasons (excuses) ;) 22:19:21 That is if you can't install oBSD for some reason. 22:19:34 You really ought to use OpenBSD, being a calgarian and all. :) 22:20:25 heheh :) 22:20:45 yeah, the support for obsd must be great in calgary ;) 22:20:52 OpenBSD is great... Very well integrated, runs on many different archs. 22:20:55 BitchX-1.0c18+ by panasync - OpenBSD 3.1 22:21:08 Heh. Ya. 22:21:27 OpenBSD quasar 3.1 GENERIC#59 i386 22:22:09 That's unfortunatley the biggest flaw in isforth, IMO... Very closely tied to x86 linux. 22:22:38 well that was his choice, besides, i really do admire isforth for it's "closeness to the metal" 22:22:43 s/it's/its 22:22:50 the syscalls are really nice 22:23:08 it's just a matter of changing the syscalls and some other code for freebsd and openbsd 22:23:10 You mean: Closeness to the OS. :) 22:23:27 and the isforth kernel can be coded for windows and macos 22:23:39 No, that isn't it. OpenBSD uses a different stack frame structure... 22:23:44 I believe... 22:23:51 I think FreeBSD is closer to linux's. 22:24:12 yeah, but doesn't openbsd also run linux executables like freebsd can? 22:24:26 there's some package thingie that you install for freebsd i think 22:24:32 and it lets you run linux code 22:24:43 It has experimental foreign binary execution, yes. 22:25:09 i think that there'll be more movement on porting isforth to freebsd and openbsd after the assembler is coded and isforth can metacompile 22:25:25 he'll be able to streamline the code and put more of it in forth i guess 22:25:37 Yes, possibly. I think it's x86 bound for the foreseeable future, anyways. 22:25:47 yeah 22:26:53 Which is kind of a shame, seeing what a poorly thought ought architecture i386 is. :) 22:27:03 Out, I mean. 22:28:54 yep 22:29:23 i really don't worry about other arhchitectures anymore ever since i discovered the existence of forthchips :P 22:30:45 i'm much more concerned about doing what i can to see markets for forthchips found, etc 22:31:03 Yes, well they're a tad overhyped, in my opinion, but interesting nonetheless... 22:31:34 and more concerned about achieving a measure of financial independence and some wealth in order to achieve certain goals, such as commisioning a forth company that finds markets for forthchips and also produces a forth os :) 22:32:31 Well, good luck. :) 22:33:37 yeah 22:33:58 well i've become pretty knowledgeable about stock trading 22:34:03 and about real estate 22:34:12 and i've got quite a few business ideas 22:34:14 heh 22:34:45 i put off stock trading because i don't have enough capital 22:35:14 so i'll mostly focus on starting up a business.. probably something simple at first like a web design business 22:35:22 particularly because my roommate is also interested 22:35:33 Don't trade stocks if you can help it. The people that control the markets are thieves. 22:35:55 we should be doing some market research sometime this week, going around knocking on business doors and asking them some questions 22:36:02 (we're targetting small businesses to start with) 22:36:27 fractal: wall street is a big money machine, just crank the handle and suckers go through to be sheared 22:36:59 i am a bit confused about whether wall street is actually economical or not 22:37:15 they argue that it's important because it enables investing and crap 22:37:17 but sometimes i wonder 22:37:26 maybe the stock exchange should be controlled by the government 22:37:33 Good man. :) 22:37:42 and it should be electronic, and the data should be distributed for free 22:38:11 It's a shame media has convinced the population that a "free market" implies governmental independance. 22:38:35 But having small portions of the population actually thinking is a good first step. 22:39:24 The "free market" is probably the largest scam of the 20th,21st (so far) century... 22:39:40 That and nazism. :) 22:40:42 um, dunno i agree with you. don't forget, the media (which is government controlled) has convinced the majority that businesses are to blame when the economy does poorly 22:42:28 What?!? The media is government controlled? You live in calgary, right? How many TV stations are publicly run? 1. 22:42:45 How many are run by a *single* media conglomerate (Canwest) about 20. 22:43:07 The others are patchworks of american corporate media, and smaller corporate interests. 22:43:18 Not even to start on advertising. 22:43:40 And the media largely says that government taxes/tarrifs are to blame for a bad economy. 22:44:18 well, perhaps i should've said, government influenced.. i was thinking of newspapers like globe and mail, national post, calgary herald.. heh 22:44:45 Funny you should mention those 3. All of them are owned by Canwest. :) 22:45:07 And they are far more influenced by their sponsors than by the government. 22:46:54 Setting aside the media for a minute, one of the most prevalant reasons economies suffer is massive corporate fraud. 22:47:05 Reason, that is. 22:48:20 that's what pretty much all canadians think and that's what the media says (i guess) 22:48:47 what corporations? what kind of fraud? how much money? where'd the money go? 22:50:07 Well, let's look at 2 examples. The first, easiest one: BreeX (spelling?). 22:50:19 I think this was a canadian company... 22:50:35 i'd think that taxes and tariffs and redtape and certain regulations are much more harmful to the economy, not to mention the size of the government and how much money gets sucked out of the economy to pay government employees, etc 22:51:07 so? investing in stock is gambling :P 22:51:09 A rather cut and dry case of escalating stock prices by making false claims to inflate stock prices, then keeping the money. 22:51:25 In otherwords, fraud. 22:51:43 This is much more common on smaller scales than BreeX 22:53:34 On the contrary, taxes and tariffs protect the economy. A lot of government money is spent bailing out private industries, providing funding for universities to build up a skilled population, etc. 22:53:51 i really don't think these corporate frauds are as harmful on the economy compared to the other things 22:53:55 umm 22:54:01 bailing out industries IS bad 22:55:54 everyone learns that in economics, but politics probably makes good economic policies quite difficult since it is more about getting and keeping the votes.. 22:56:05 i'm a bit tired 22:56:07 Umm... No it isn't. Consider if the canadian government stopped funding farmers during bad seasons. Many farmers would simply not be able to maintain the farm, and it would have to be written off. The next season, when conditions have improved, there will be less farmers, producing less product, hurting the economy. 22:56:13 otherwise i would go into a more indepth explanation of economics 22:57:15 well, one of the important things with proper economic policies is that they may hurt the economy in the short term, but in the long term (i.e. 5 years later) the economy is better as a result 22:57:16 Well, since you live in alberta, your education has been hugely biased towards right-wing ideas. 22:57:56 Assuming you were educated in alberta, of course. 22:57:56 well i was a communist until the day i took econ 201 and read the textbook twice :P 22:58:08 i was in bc for grades 10 to 12 22:59:59 Well, the thing about economics is that it's research and promotion are very well privatley funded, while socialist research has a small, dwindling support base. 23:00:17 Er, "Free market" economics, that is. 23:00:47 fractal: i'm influenced strongly by economic and libertarian thoughts 23:01:16 Yes, it's difficult to avoid it in alberta, sadly. 23:02:04 well what other system is workable besides economics/libertarian ? 23:02:30 after all, i think it's pretty clear that communism won't work and especially, big governments won't work 23:02:45 unless the big government had a totally different structure than current day governments 23:02:52 --- nick: pyromania -> Grant 23:02:55 Unfortunatley, libertarianism is a capitalist movement initiated and supported by a small portion of wealthy interests who will realize signifigant economic gains in "rolling back the state". 23:03:07 a way has to be found in order to make the political system much more correct 23:03:48 Well, interestingly, there is suprisingly little evidence that a centralized government IS inefficient. 23:03:49 instead of a political system that merely encourages the politicians to become corrupt and/or to do the most expedient thing rather than the "right" thing 23:04:13 uh, well it has nothing to do with the government but more to do with its political processes 23:04:15 Well, unfortunatley that's human nature you're talking about. 23:04:34 you realize that neither canada nor the usa are democratic countries? 23:04:50 Corporate executives are just as likely to be corrupt, and more likely to get away with it than politicians 23:05:15 Well, that depends what you mean by "a democratic country". 23:06:00 they barely qualify because the vast amount of people are ignorant and only a small fraction vote, which doesn't necessarily reflect the wishes of the majority accurately 23:06:50 fractal: i guess the difference in our thinking can probably be traced to whether or not we believe that "wealthy interests who realize significant economic gains" is a bad thing for the economy 23:06:52 As an example of centralized government working better than private initiatives: Take the ontarian government. They recently privatized their electric system, and found that after a year or so, prices have soared, outages have become more common and lasted longer, and customer service has decreased drastically. 23:07:33 well i don't know about the electric system, is it a monopoly? was the government previously subsidizing it ? 23:07:52 can the electrical infrastructure be shared with multiple electricity companies? 23:07:56 can there be effective competition? 23:08:17 i think you picked a poor example 23:08:19 No, it was previously run by a government division, ontario power, I believe. 23:08:32 yeah but it was probably heavily subsidized 23:08:35 to keep the prices low 23:09:14 That doesn't particularly matter. Taxes didn't decrease after the privatization. 23:09:39 anyways, you believe that when mysterious "capital interests" (a neat term that enables us to conjure dark evil images for) make a profit, that some how the economy is hurt by that? 23:11:25 Well, I never said "capital interests", and I'm not quite sure what that means, but when an already wealthy party makes money, it takes the money out of the moving economy. 23:11:35 Generally, that is. 23:13:13 see, in economic thinking, when some businessman goes out, and produces something and sells it to somebody, and both win-win because the business man was able to sell it for more than it cost him and the customer was able to buy it at a price he was willing to pay (or lower than his max price).. the difference in prices for the customer and for the supplier is called "surplus". the bigger the total surplus, the better the economy is doing 23:13:18 Califronia has experienced almost identical problems after privatizing their power grid, too, incidentally. 23:13:43 i don't see how an already wealthy party making money takes money out of the economy? surely the wealthy party isn't going to put his money under his bed 23:14:16 the media villianizes the "wealthy elite" far too much, altho some of them may deserve the villianization 23:14:32 Well, no, probably not, but he will likely use that money only to gain more money. 23:15:29 Well, it's actually quite funny you keep using the media as an example for this, as they almost exclusively represent private interests. 23:15:45 Take, for instance, a close to home example for you. 23:15:57 did you know that when the government taxes us, it actually takes out a geometric proportion of the surplus? that the greater the taxes, the geometrically less surplus left over in the economy. this illustrates why taxes are actually VERY harmful, and this is why the government should be as streamlined as possible (i'm not arguing against health care or education, on the contrary, i support public health care and education) 23:16:33 The kyoto protocol. The albertan media has almost made talking about possible positive issues about the protocol a taboo. 23:17:01 personally, i believe that the government should be as streamlined as possible while providing quality public education and health care 23:17:21 taxes hurt the economy geometrically to the increase in taxes 23:18:01 Uh huh. So you propose that these public services should be funded out of the goodness of companies' hearts? 23:18:42 ?? 23:18:52 Because what else could "streamlining the government" (a phrase the media loves) mean but reducing taxes? 23:19:45 lining them up so we can march them into the ocean? 23:19:52 it means (to me) reducing the beaurucracy as much as possible. it means abolishing all positions that can be abolished 23:19:59 it means changing the structure of the government 23:20:05 perhaps getting rid of the senate? 23:20:15 taxes make you subservient to your government 23:20:24 "incom" taxes are UNCONSTITUTIONAL 23:20:26 it means getting rid of positions granted via a process known as "patronage" 23:20:38 neway im off to bed :) 23:20:41 nite 23:20:46 --- quit: I440r ("Reality Strikes Again!") 23:21:48 xef4: when i say "streamlining the government" i'm thinking different things :P 23:21:53 i'm confident there's a lot of bloat 23:22:04 the political system ensures that :P 23:22:12 Ok, perhaps a reasonable goal. However, you have no problem with corporate bloat and beauracracy? This detracts from the economy as much as any governmental bloat. 23:23:14 don't subsidize companies, don't let them lobby, don't give special treatment to them because they gave you lots of money for your campaign, and don't support monopolies 23:23:25 most monopolies are actually government created 23:23:46 other monopolies are natural and acceptable (because they keep competitive in order to prevent new companies from entering the market) 23:23:48 That's rubbish, of course. 23:24:02 what is rubbish? 23:24:14 In fact, the only thing that maintains any level of competition in the markets is government intervention. 23:24:27 That most monopolies are government created. 23:24:39 I've heard that argument used time and time again. 23:24:54 What is most distressing is that there is almost no factual evidene for this. 23:25:12 name some canadian monopolies 23:25:28 oh 23:25:35 Well, the one we've talked about most often, today: Canwest. 23:26:00 airlines are great examples, even tho this isn't technically a monopoly 23:26:01 um 23:26:14 i don't know much about canwest 23:26:22 who is it owned by? 23:26:26 is it a public corporation? 23:26:42 Okay, so let me get this straight. Airlines are a great example of a government created monopoly except for the little problem that it isn't a monopoly? 23:27:04 It's owned by the Aspers, I believe. 23:27:14 And I'm not %100 if it's public. 23:27:29 did Canada ever have a state booze monopoly? 23:27:29 I don't think that's very signifigant, either. 23:27:59 what's aspers? 23:29:01 XeF4 : Not particularly. In fact, canada allows for more freedom in the alcohol market than the US does. We don't prohibit cubans from selling their rum here. 23:29:35 fractal: well airlines are pretty well supported by the government and it is hard for new airlines to break into the market because of the government, so we're left with all these airlines that are just bleeding shitloads of money and crying to uncle government for subsidies, (and the airlines cried to the government to protect it from new upstart airlines). most of what i know about airlines is more USA than canadian though 23:29:36 thin : The apers (aspens, maybe?). They're a very wealthy Israeli family that owns a signifigant chunk of canadas media. 23:31:00 we basically have a bunch of airlines who've gotten great protection from the government from new startup airlines, and then when they fuck up and bleed shitloads of money like recently, they run to the government for subsidies 23:31:13 Well, I don't know much about airlines either, but I do know that airline prices are fairly cutthroat here. 23:31:24 for the most part, it is bad economics to subsidize companies 23:31:56 Well, that's not necessarily true, but no bother. 23:32:06 heh :P 23:32:15 i'm getting too lazy to argue this too ;P 23:32:23 Well, take universities. 23:32:40 why is canwest a monopoly? 23:32:48 what does it have a monopoly on? 23:33:13 They are, essentially, for-profit-corporations. The government subsidizing forces a more open learning environment, which means a more diversified educated population, which means a better economy. 23:34:11 It has a monopoly almost solely by virtue that it controls the most popular existing media infrastructure. 23:34:51 well i personally believe the education system sucks and should be radically changed (yes, i have a few ideas) ;) 23:35:08 Media monopolies are much like operating system monopolies: There are many other OSs out there, but since MS can essentially control the direction of the industry, it has a monopoly. 23:35:08 well, i'm not that extreme 23:35:37 Well, the education system is too inaccesible, so I aggree. 23:35:45 but with a different education system/structure, universities could be more competitive.. 23:35:51 fractal: yes, exactly! 23:35:57 education system is too inaccessible 23:36:04 i think that if there should be 1 change made 23:36:17 it should be to make the education system more finer grained 23:36:22 especiall the university level 23:36:33 What? 23:37:40 change it from a degree-based system to a different more finer-grained system 23:38:00 Hm. Perhaps. I haven't really thought about that. 23:38:24 it would be especially neat if there was a formal way to represent the knowledge, skills, talents, interests of people.. kind of like combining a resume and a degree and making it better 23:38:34 I'm far more concerned about the incorporation of universities, to tell the truth. 23:39:09 so that people can just learn more specific things that they are interested in, and being able to say "hey, i can do this and that" and it would make it easier for companies to find the suitable employees it needs 23:39:23 i should go to bed 23:39:25 good night 23:39:31 Night. 23:43:52 --- quit: thin ("nightnight") 23:49:30 --- quit: proteusguy (Connection timed out) 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/02.11.10