00:00:00 --- log: started forth/03.02.20 00:29:31 --- quit: Serg_Penguin (Killed (NickServ (Nickname Enforcement))) 00:29:37 --- join: fgsggfhag (~Z@nat-ch1.nat.comex.ru) joined #forth 00:30:10 --- nick: fgsggfhag -> serg 00:46:30 --- quit: Speuler (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 01:28:41 --- quit: serg () 02:04:22 --- join: Serg_Penguin (~Z@nat-ch1.nat.comex.ru) joined #forth 02:31:03 --- quit: Serg_Penguin () 03:45:13 --- join: Serg_Penguin (~Z@nat-ch1.nat.comex.ru) joined #forth 04:07:11 --- quit: Soap` (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)) 04:37:56 --- join: Speuler (~Speuler@mnch-d9ba471a.pool.mediaWays.net) joined #forth 04:38:33 'morning 04:47:45 z 04:49:16 hi 04:49:38 whadda u work on nowdays ? 04:49:51 me - nothing 05:40:20 --- quit: Robert (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 05:42:12 --- join: Robert (~snofs@h138n2fls31o965.telia.com) joined #forth 05:53:32 --- join: gilbertbsd (~gilbert@fl-nked-ubr2-c3a-29.dad.adelphia.net) joined #forth 05:53:36 --- quit: Serg_Penguin (Killed (NickServ (Nickname Enforcement))) 05:53:37 --- join: fgsggfhag (~Z@nat-ch1.nat.comex.ru) joined #forth 05:53:43 --- nick: fgsggfhag -> serg 05:53:54 hi Serg_Penguin. 05:54:02 ahem 05:54:08 hi 05:54:11 ah 05:54:20 asked me 'bout working on what ? 05:54:27 yeah 05:54:30 was kind of slow reading :) 05:54:33 ah 05:54:44 current fun project is bashforth 05:55:00 which is, a forth written in bash 05:55:13 i gave up on putting (forth) proggie in BIOS, coz i see no use 4 it 05:55:32 * serg would better extend Frth towards being shell 05:55:43 a shell forth? 05:55:46 pure bash intended, but input stream parsing gets kind of difficult 05:55:57 i might require external help by sed 05:56:10 but still trying to keep it pure 05:56:38 kinda like INTERCAL :) 05:56:44 will be damn slow 05:56:46 nope. full forth 05:56:51 ain't 05:56:56 is quicker than i expected 05:57:05 it'll be more practical in Perl, and faster 05:57:12 but can't execute real benchmarks yet 05:57:25 Perl compiles internally be4 executuing 05:57:30 who cares about "practical" :) 05:57:39 and native code compiler is promised 05:57:57 but i want to use bash 05:58:08 just 4 fun ? 05:58:13 yo 05:59:24 anyway, consider Perl 06:00:12 i'd probably use python rather than perl 06:00:27 but where's the fun with that ? 06:00:37 folks say Perl loses just few times to GCC 06:00:40 i mean, a forth in another lang is just another forth 06:01:01 but forth in bash is something else 06:02:11 at one point i want to implement valve-forth 06:02:14 so why not on Turing mashine ? 06:02:39 started with brainforth in brainfuck, which is pretty much a turing machine 06:02:51 stopped when it became evident that it was feasable 06:03:04 memory interface needed some inventiveness 06:04:01 would need to fill in the details now. which is kind of tedious 06:06:02 * serg is begging Intel 2 add second stack and some Forth instructions :)))))))))) 06:09:09 what is valve-forth? 06:13:31 valves are better in Q-multiplier, mostly double triodes )) 06:16:20 and a q-multiplier == ? 06:17:23 easy radio reciever w/ positive feedback and hi input impedance of RF amplifier 06:18:30 gilbertbsd: cpu build from hydraulic valves. forth interpreter running on it 06:19:15 a visual cpu. 06:19:24 using coloured liquids 06:20:11 Speuler does such a thing exist? 06:20:22 gilbertbsd: i do hope that it doesn't 06:20:35 but seen no reference to such a thing 06:21:19 how would you program such a machine. 06:21:37 is the bodies arteries and veins part of a valve CPU? 06:21:38 probably direct threaded interpreter 06:21:55 maybe token-threaded 06:22:19 --- quit: serg () 06:22:36 nope. belongs to the supporting functions, not the cpu itself 06:23:17 human cpu i'd call chemo-electric, not hydraulic 06:23:26 the brain? 06:23:32 and nerve system 06:24:43 this is possible isn't it? 06:24:58 valve cpu ? yeah, sure 06:25:29 a little noisy though 06:26:27 each valve a tiny "click" when switching, multiplied by n-thousand ... 06:26:41 how are you gonna build it? 06:26:53 got some idead 06:27:01 it will be RISC won't it? 06:27:02 ideas 06:27:06 yes 06:27:20 you could try the Single Instruction Computer. 06:27:22 some functions non-valve based. for example, comparator 06:27:28 once that has SBNZ a, b, c you have a CPU 06:27:52 also, storage wouldn't be built from valve-flipflops 06:28:54 how would you shift a number with a one instruction cpu (when asked earlier, i got the answer "you need to add those functions") 06:29:13 shift? 06:29:22 but, sure, i can say "a piece of wire is a computer. just add the missing gates" 06:29:34 I think SBNZ {subtract branch not zero } implies a lot and condenses a great deal. 06:29:46 Subtraction automatically implies counting and addition. 06:29:58 once you have counting, you have a loop going somewhere. 06:30:05 hehehe. 06:31:11 i manage to implement some operations with a turing machine. but, can you implement a turing machine with SBNZ ? 06:32:11 it is turing complete I hear. 06:32:15 or is it? 06:32:25 right- and left shifts are not too difficult to do with a turing machine 06:36:19 --- join: Serg_Penguin (~Z@nat-ch1.nat.comex.ru) joined #forth 06:36:29 re 06:36:40 don't they only move right and left? 06:36:43 or is it the tape? 06:38:52 shift left is adding a number to itself. easy 06:39:29 shift right is splitting a number over two locations (ping-pong increment one, then the other) 06:39:33 div/2 06:39:36 Speuler do you know much about valves and such or is this gonna be a pure experiment? 06:40:03 i followed a course hydraulics/pneumatics 06:40:20 built a few things with valves already 06:41:03 a valve is like a gate 06:41:24 and, as you can built a cpu from gates, you can build it using valves 06:41:49 w 1/10 Hz clock ^) 06:42:02 will take half\day to -ROT :) 06:42:20 10 hz should be easy 06:42:21 --- join: tathi (~josh@wsip68-15-54-54.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth 06:42:32 for sure there are quicker valves 06:43:14 must keep the hose diameter small 06:44:19 there's lot's of space for optimizetions too 06:44:29 don't need to implement everything with valves 06:44:42 for comparison, a pair of scales would be more suited 06:45:34 might also consider to add optical sensors, for liquid level measurements 06:45:50 but that is electronic! 06:45:55 no need to make it a pure valve design 06:46:32 as long as the involved processes are visible 06:59:37 Speuler did you say you knew brainf*ck ? 07:01:32 --- quit: Serg_Penguin () 07:09:47 gilbertbsd: jo 07:10:47 who doesn't :) 07:11:59 you are crazy. 07:12:06 thank you 07:13:02 that's what people tend to say when i say "i program in forth" :) 07:14:03 but a forth in brainf*? 07:14:25 Surely that goes against everything that is good and descent in the world ! 07:14:53 tought me some new principles 07:15:21 such as "how to implement absolute addressing, using a turing machine" 07:15:27 really? 07:15:34 is brainf* worth paying attention to? 07:15:39 no 07:16:17 huh? 07:16:20 stopped about a year ago with it, after had the needs sorted out, and developed approaches to solve them 07:16:33 what remains are a number of primitives 07:16:48 was a partly academical quest 07:17:40 bashforth makes more sense 07:19:42 I think brainf*ck looks like a bloated turing interpreter :D 07:20:47 i'm trying to solve a new problem now, which i have in bashforth 07:21:25 yesterday's problem was "how do i emit a char, where i got the ascii in base 10 on stack" 07:21:39 which found a simple, efficient solution 07:21:59 now it is "how do i process the input stream" 07:22:12 i can split it into words, but not into characters 07:22:44 or, if i enter input char wise, i can't distinguish between space and enter 07:23:52 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth 07:24:27 surely bash sees the difference! 07:25:06 only way yet to enter single chars, is with read -sn 1 var 07:25:11 var is empty for both return and space 07:25:38 i can buffer the whole line in a variable, sure 07:25:53 but i haven't found a way to parse the string yet 07:26:13 you might have to write a small parser then won't you? 07:26:13 where jsut being able to cut the string into chars would do already 07:26:34 yes, have to. but, no functions found to do so 07:27:02 it would be easy using something like sed 07:27:15 but i want to refrain from using external commands 07:27:29 or awk. 07:27:34 xactly 07:27:43 even "cut" 07:27:45 can you use cut 07:27:48 touche 07:28:08 /usr/bin/cut ... 07:28:13 not internal to bash 07:28:31 so basically you just need to create a columnwise parser right? 07:28:59 hey hows about xargs ? 07:29:04 that isn't internal is it? 07:30:01 `...` is internal 07:30:36 ... 07:30:42 what does ... do? 07:30:48 i tried to pipe the whole line to read . 07:30:58 same as xargs ... 07:31:06 | xargs ... 07:32:55 file `which foo` same as which foo | xargs file 07:33:06 oh you mean backquotes. 07:33:19 jo 07:35:22 I am strangely drawn to brainf* 07:35:31 its pulling me and I can't pull back. 07:35:45 you crazy too ? 07:35:52 no not at all. 07:35:55 I am not even a geek :D 07:36:06 the language itself is easy 07:36:19 but writing something with it is the problem 07:36:39 how is that a problem. 07:36:42 i have an optimizing translator for it 07:36:59 Lemme explain my 'theory' of layers of languages. You just need to find appropriate pseudocode :D 07:37:42 so c code might be very good pseudocode for brainf*ck. 07:37:46 about everything is pseudocode for gate-level state changes 07:38:14 good you understand! 07:38:37 you learn that from esoteric languages like brainfuck :) 07:38:58 or valve processors 07:39:28 even from forth 07:40:24 I tried explaining that to someone here. 07:40:31 I forget who already :D 07:41:35 LIES! LIES! "Gates" are just pseudocode for electron interactions! It's a conspiracy! 07:42:42 :) 07:43:13 well, a gate is an abstraction of electron behaviour on semiconducting layers 07:44:23 and electrons are pseudocode for what Kitanin? 07:45:07 just as an assembly opcode is an abstraction for a more complex action on a number of gates 07:45:09 Quark interactions, obviously. 07:45:25 It's _all_ about smackin' the quarks together... :-) 07:46:14 given that a "gate" is at the software-hardware interface, i can accept this abstraction, just to be able to focus on the software portion 07:47:31 speuler I agree completely. 07:47:54 an atom is just a model, describing the characteristics of a far more complex system 07:48:00 I called the higher languages pseudosemanticcode. 07:48:17 it turns out the atom is not a terribly accurate model. 07:49:21 it works for many cases satisfactorily, but we shouldn't confuse our image of an atom with the actual processes involved to get something which resembles what we call "atom" 07:49:56 where many of those are still a mysterium for us 07:51:18 my chemistry teacher used to say: 07:51:39 we don't know much about atoms. what we know is: they are not green, and they don't stick 07:52:01 I don't think we can understand or even need to understand the atom so well unless we have to create atoms ourselves. 07:52:23 attotechnic 07:52:37 nanotech ? 07:52:51 wrong scale :) 07:53:15 femtotech 07:54:36 at the point at which men with buggy brains starts making little things that other men cannot see, I shall move to an Island somewhere off the coast of africa. 07:54:44 I will have nothing to do with the matter. 07:55:00 combat virii 07:55:25 battle quarks 07:55:42 we are unable not to make errors. 07:55:55 We are error prone in our ways. 07:55:58 there are no errors 07:56:08 and technology simply amplifies those 'errors'. 07:56:09 there is only what is 07:56:24 what is is entropy. Undesired, undesigned, unintended. 07:56:35 thats what I perceive as an error. 07:57:05 "error" is a matter of definition 07:57:28 hence my perception of men and their ways as buggy. 07:57:38 without one to define "error", there's no error 07:58:08 one needs not define error for it to exist nevertheless. 07:58:21 * Speuler disagrees 07:58:22 as long as there exists a state or states of entropy, there is nothing to be done about it. 07:58:35 A state. there can't be more than one . 07:59:06 eg. Zero. it existed inspite of it not being named for the longest time. 07:59:31 other forms of it had been named like 'nothing' and 'nihilus'. 07:59:46 but it wasn't seen as a common enough denominator. 07:59:49 void 08:01:05 in the same way, error exists. 08:01:16 unless you are trying to say we simply perceive a void... 08:01:37 and we chose to name the abscence of things we cannot perceive . 08:02:30 "error" is to attribute a sense of incorrectness to something. it doesn't exist on its own 08:03:46 correctness and incorrectness are states necessary for survival. 08:03:56 Eg, it is incorrect to imbibe poison. 08:04:02 but it is correct to imbibe food. 08:04:34 there's poison, and there's food. 08:04:45 where is "error" ? 08:04:53 in the output. 08:04:55 in the result. 08:05:00 it can be perceived. 08:05:10 it needs to be perceived 08:05:21 eg. 08:05:26 or their won't be a concept of "error" 08:05:34 do you agree that it is an error to imbibe poison? 08:06:02 from the point of view of the involved victim, yes 08:06:05 hehehe. 08:06:43 but my point is that thanks to technology, man is able to AMPLIFY their errors. 08:07:07 so imagine dropping a little bit of cyanide 'accidentally' into all the breweries in germany. 08:07:14 would you agree that it is an error to move your right hand ? 08:07:43 it can be perceived as an error in one of mans infinite 'proper way to do things' if i was'nt meant to. 08:07:56 you add to entropy that wat 08:07:57 way 08:08:04 for the 'victim'. 08:08:22 for there to be error, the observer has to perceive a victim as well. 08:08:41 eg it is an error to murder another human. 08:08:45 that is, there are changes of state 08:08:50 But the state and soldiers and the police are allowed to. 08:09:11 but there's no error, exisiting outside if the perception of one to judge about it 08:09:16 of ... 08:10:09 is it an error to spoil our environment ? 08:10:26 if we don't think it is then it isn't. 08:10:55 future species, thriving on the change of conditions, wouldn't agree 08:11:01 s/think/perceive/ 08:11:19 but we are not the future species. 08:11:40 we cannot think through all our actions since there is time delay involved in a lot of the consequences. 08:11:47 true. we are not. but, universe is not build around humanity 08:11:50 significant time delay I might add. 08:12:00 built 08:12:03 thankfully the universe isn't built around humans. 08:12:23 the universe is a slow slow machine :) 08:12:30 not really 08:12:38 it is slow by human standards 08:12:44 indeed. 08:13:08 well slowness is a filter we apply to things we perceive. 08:13:20 abstracting to speed. 08:13:40 and further back/forward to time. 08:13:52 its all because we have long term memories. 08:14:05 it all wouldn't matter if we woke up with nothing in our heads but the OS :) 08:14:14 ... day in and day out. 08:14:28 would we know ? 08:14:35 good question. 08:14:40 we would behave differently. 08:14:57 DO we know ? 08:15:08 that we wake up with nothing but the OS? 08:15:28 e.g. welt am draht, 13th floor, matrix etc 08:15:50 popular topic for a series of movies 08:15:58 yes indeed. 08:16:16 if movies are made about certain topics, it shows that there ma be a popular interest in those topics 08:16:46 there is a movie I am trying to remember... 08:16:50 it starts with an 'm'. 08:16:59 mad max ? 08:17:04 no. 08:17:08 hehe 08:17:12 it too is based on memory. 08:17:14 metropolis 08:17:20 no not that one. 08:17:41 matrix 08:17:52 you already mentioned that. 08:18:06 what was it about ? 08:18:22 a guy who was trying to exact revenge after his wife was murdered. 08:18:55 he was injured as he tried to rescue her. 08:19:17 and the result was that he could remember everything before, but not after and he couldn't make anymore long term memories. 08:19:29 he was dead 08:19:34 he wasn't. 08:19:55 he had to tatoo facts all over his body and take polaroids of everything. 08:20:00 was there a scene of a car running from a bridge, into a river ? 08:20:04 no. 08:20:20 there was a scene of him running after someone and then he said 'what am I doing, oh yes following that guy' 08:20:24 'no he is following me'. 08:21:02 no recollection of having watched that movie 08:21:05 Memento :) 08:21:15 thats what its called. 08:22:39 i think i'll use cut for the moment, until i have another idea, or find something else. 08:22:53 the movie-> http://www.allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=A220920 08:24:17 speuler it seems you might have to write a 'cut' or a columnifier in bash. 08:27:38 input is split nicely into chars, across an array now 08:29:10 except spaces ... 08:33:58 I have to go to school now. 08:34:10 I'll print out the latest forthing bash when I get there :D 08:34:13 --- quit: gilbertbsd ("Client Exiting") 08:34:26 the latest you haven't got yet 08:34:30 still working on it 08:35:00 v0.09 has the ascii table building simplified a lot 08:35:14 but no functional change, thus not sent out yet 08:35:32 ascii table build in 7 lines now 08:36:00 for ((i=0;i<128;i++)) ; do 08:36:00 n=5f # assume control char 08:36:00 if [ $i -ge 32 ] ; then # control chars show as underscore 08:36:00 n=`printf %x $i` # calc hex ascii, stuff char into table 08:36:01 fi 08:36:02 asc[$i]=`echo -en "\x$n"` 08:36:02 done 08:36:42 foo=" bar" , foo=' bar' all strip leading spaces ... 08:36:55 may have to tr first 08:45:08 solution i think 08:45:30 i count len of string before and after cutting one char 08:45:38 the diff i add to the index into the array 08:46:12 i.e. index is bumped by the amount of trimmed trailing spaces + 1 08:46:47 this gives me at least empty array elements for spaces 08:46:51 which is just as good 09:29:41 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 10:06:22 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth 10:18:55 --- quit: Speuler (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)) 10:19:44 --- join: Speuler (~Speuler@mnch-d9ba469e.pool.mediaWays.net) joined #forth 10:52:00 --- join: gilbertbsd (~gilbert@fl-nked-ubr2-c3a-29.dad.adelphia.net) joined #forth 10:58:16 --- join: Herkamire (~jason@wsip68-15-54-54.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth 11:30:25 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 11:47:19 --- quit: Speuler (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 12:09:54 --- join: Speuler (~Speuler@mnch-d9ba469e.pool.mediaWays.net) joined #forth 12:10:09 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth 12:19:23 'day 12:19:51 hi 12:21:03 gilbertbsd: what's your last version of bashforth ? 12:21:21 the first one. I didn't make it to school yet :) 12:21:27 I will be there in the next 30 minutes. 12:21:38 I've been here struggling with xmms and shoutcast. 12:21:43 ah. 12:22:03 0.09 is the last sent off one. 0.10 is in work 12:40:21 --- quit: gilbertbsd ("Client Exiting") 13:06:25 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 13:08:05 --- join: marekb (~marekb@a112-177.dialup.iol.cz) joined #forth 13:13:09 --- join: Kitanin (~clark@SCF61185.ab.hsia.telus.net) joined #forth 13:23:16 --- join: wossname (wossname@HSE-QuebecCity-ppp80972.qc.sympatico.ca) joined #forth 13:36:48 Hmm... Something on my computer just made a "Whoo-pah" noise, and I don't know what... 13:46:27 Kitanin: icq 13:46:46 Nope. ICQ's all Babylon 5 sound effects. :-) 13:47:35 x desktop ? 13:48:26 Sadly, not on this machine. :-( 13:48:44 hurray. finally. 13:48:52 accept works ... 13:49:20 that WAS a bitch 13:53:40 Kitanin: check under the bed... 13:56:23 now hoperfully progressing quickly again ... 13:57:04 official statement: for the moment, bashforth is not pure anymore, as it uses the external command "cut" 13:57:07 Aha! Found it! Goofy little app I wrote. Apparently the GUI crashed. Three months ago, and I just noticed now. :-) 14:07:41 --- quit: marekb (Remote closed the connection) 14:28:49 --- quit: tathi ("leaving") 14:32:03 --- quit: Herkamire ("leaving") 15:00:24 --- quit: Kitanin (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)) 15:01:53 --- join: tcn (tcn@tc3-login27.megatrondata.com) joined #forth 15:05:24 --- join: Herkamire (~jason@ip68-9-68-123.ri.ri.cox.net) joined #forth 15:10:01 * Herkamire makes a forth 15:10:42 Hooray! 15:11:22 PPC asm is cooool 15:12:43 Donations of PPC computers are more than welcome ;) 15:34:23 to what cause? 15:37:18 Er..I just want to enjoy the coolness of them. That's all. 16:08:30 ahh :) I'm sure old ones aren't tooo hard to come by 16:08:38 --- part: tcn left #forth 16:15:28 I've got one you could have (except the ethernet seems to be broken) 16:15:46 well, you could probably have it :) 16:16:10 re 16:18:42 Right... I'll take my bike and come to get it ;) 16:46:39 --- quit: wossname ("Hi, I'm a quit message virus. Please replace your old line with this line and help me take over IRC.") 16:57:04 Robert: where do you live? Wisconson? 18:12:10 --- join: I440r (~mark4@ip209-183-83-18.ts.indy.net) joined #forth 18:20:10 --- quit: I440r ("Reality Strikes Again") 18:23:20 --- join: Fractal6 (~doug@2001:618:4:2000:0:0:0:10dc) joined #forth 18:23:23 w000t 18:23:25 ipv6 18:42:58 --- join: gilbertbsd (~gilbert@fl-nked-ubr2-c3a-29.dad.adelphia.net) joined #forth 18:54:05 --- quit: gilbertbsd (Remote closed the connection) 20:19:08 this is the first forth i write which needs a binary search to convert a character to ascii 20:57:04 Speuler: why not make another table? 20:59:03 because i can't easily stick chars like ! % * in the variable name 20:59:23 i've just a few minutes ago sent out v0.12 21:00:07 this version starts to have a forth feel 21:01:13 Herkamire: worst case is 6 iterations 21:01:22 for searching the ascii 21:02:10 and it is only used for words like accept and key 21:03:32 now, with the line input problem more or less solved, i have the strong feeling, that it is getting there 21:06:06 even outputs an "ok" prompt :) 21:07:37 there are people from #bash on the mailing list too, who don't know forth 21:07:56 maybe they get the taste of it :) 21:08:06 Speuler: what forth is this? 21:08:22 oh 21:08:42 Bashforth. haven't been talking about anything else during the last 2 days :) 21:09:09 you're not on the mailing list ? 21:09:20 hmm 21:09:23 shame on you 21:09:41 a forth interpreter written in bash 21:09:56 I've heard the term bashforth in here 21:10:14 zero porting effort forth 21:10:23 where should I read about it? (forth logs? webpage?) 21:10:24 got bash ? bashforth runs 21:10:38 nope. none. you ask me to add you to mailing list 21:10:46 and new version will be sent to you 21:10:56 a forth interpreter written in bash??? 21:11:05 yes 21:11:10 hot item :) 21:11:12 you silly silly boy 21:11:26 it is? 21:11:28 why? 21:11:32