00:00:00 --- log: started forth/03.11.02 00:01:30 The Linux kernel. 00:03:25 wrong 00:03:40 Hint: It involves Graphics 00:03:48 :) 00:05:26 X11 00:06:16 XFree86 00:06:19 :( 00:06:29 eck 00:06:37 whats the difference between the two, btw? 00:07:20 X11 is the open industry standard. XFree86 is a specific implementation of said standard. 00:08:24 ok. 00:08:38 aargh 00:08:59 heres something you have to explain to me .. it creates a file (using perl), then deletes it immediately after 00:09:16 (this is during teh build process) 00:11:07 wow ... it finished building. now i have to wait anoher 2 hours for it to install .. lol 00:12:02 :) 00:12:09 Yep, that's XFree for you. 00:12:56 :) 00:13:11 * arke needs a wireless keyboard 00:13:25 * arke needs some way to type from bed 00:13:28 * kc5tja needs the synaptic link to my computer. :D 00:13:41 * arke is such a dumbass moving his bed to the opposite side of the room 00:13:50 :) 00:14:24 Heh 00:14:38 Speaking of which, I still have my ham radio in my car. I'll have to set it up again tomorrow. 00:14:43 * kc5tja is too lazy to do anything with it now. 00:15:53 oh 00:15:58 did they evac you? 00:16:07 * arke dies 00:16:14 aaaarrrrgggghhhh 00:16:20 this is gcc's fault!! 00:16:25 grrr 00:16:42 SYMFUNCALIAS(xf86setjmp, setjmp) 00:17:18 xf86sym.c:902: `setjmp' undeclared here (not in a function) 00:17:49 Ouch. 00:18:14 Sounds like somebody forgot a #include statement. 00:18:26 read that line again. 00:18:34 thats not the problem 00:18:35 eck 00:18:39 cpp ickyness 00:18:43 gimme a hand please 00:18:52 typedef void (*funcptr)(void) 00:19:35 I did. 00:19:46 And it says, "setjmp undeclared here". :) 00:19:48 #define SYMFUNCALIAS( name, func ) { name, (funcptr)&func }, 00:19:52 To me, that's a symbol not defined error. 00:19:54 yes 00:20:13 setjmp undeclared here, but declared everywhere else, because its in a function 00:20:34 gimme a hand trying to do this 00:20:41 In the file that SYMFUNCALLS is used, it lacks a #include 00:20:57 It doesn't matter if it's used anywhere else. 00:21:02 SYMFUNCALIAS(xf86setjmp, setjmp); 00:21:05 .... 00:21:16 Yes. So? 00:22:10 { xf86setjmp, (funcptr)&setjmp }, 00:22:14 I'm trying to expand it 00:22:32 because i'm sure its not a setjmp problem 00:23:00 arke: I'm not sure you're reading my posts correctly. 00:23:00 :0 00:23:02 :) 00:23:11 see, I addded it, and it still happened 00:23:15 because 00:23:23 its undeclared "here" only 00:24:02 That's not physically possible. 00:24:16 If you #include'd setjmp.h, setjmp() is defined. Guaranteed. 00:24:23 Yes. 00:24:27 Of course. 00:24:39 However, you can't use it outside of a function 00:24:49 Sure you can. 00:24:51 and i guess theres a spoof or such here 00:24:54 It's a function. 00:24:54 no 00:25:02 you can't do a 00:25:14 setjmp(); int main() { ... } 00:25:24 you have to use it in a function 00:25:34 however, you can have a pointer outside of a function 00:25:35 No, but you can certainly refer to it outside of a function, which is precisely what the error line is doing. 00:25:42 and i think thats what its trying to do 00:25:46 No. 00:25:54 It's not trying to invoke setjmp() at all. 00:26:08 yes, thats exactly what i mean :) 00:26:12 lol 00:26:18 It's typecasting &setjmp to a function pointer, taking void, and returning void. 00:26:23 That's not the same as calling it. 00:26:32 And that type of reference is well within C's limitations. 00:26:32 yep 00:26:39 and gcc is bitching about it 00:26:42 and i dont know why 00:27:01 #include does not help either. 00:28:15 * kc5tja is wondering if setjmp is being defined as a macro. 00:31:33 see, the weird thing is that theres several SYMFUNCALIAS 00:31:39 this is the only one that faults 00:32:13 * kc5tja checks his setjmp.h file 00:34:05 It's hard to tell what, exactly, is going on. But there is a macro definition for setjmp AND a function declaration for setjmp in setjmp.h. 00:34:19 * arke slaps glibc 00:34:29 Yeah, it's pretty retarded. 00:34:33 * arke slaps glibc 00:34:34 * arke slaps glibc 00:34:34 * arke slaps glibc 00:34:35 * arke slaps glibc 00:34:52 u hah! 00:35:06 . 00:35:09 I wish I could help. 00:35:13 (further, at least) 00:36:36 im thinking of a fix ... 00:38:09 aaah 00:38:11 i get it 00:38:29 there is no setjmp function, seemingly, just a few macros for sigsetjmp 00:38:36 and the weird thing is 00:38:51 X is supposed to use sigsetjmp if it exists 00:38:58 * arke slaps X 00:40:46 #define HAS_GLIBC_SIGSETJMP 00:40:50 * arke hopes this works... 00:41:18 ackackackackackackack 00:41:28 __sigsetjmp undeclared here 00:41:33 longjmp undeclared here 00:42:07 however, I, GCC, ruler of all C compilers, have included setjmp.h, however, I am an evil bitch and I don't wanna work. Fuck you. Very much. 00:42:47 hrm 00:42:50 wait 00:43:04 possible workage. .... 00:44:13 --- join: karingo (karingo@11.portland-03-04rs.or.dial-access.att.net) joined #forth 00:48:29 Bedtime for me. 00:48:45 --- quit: kc5tja ("THX QSO ES 73 DE KC5TJA/6 CL ES QRT AR SK") 01:11:56 --- quit: arke ("Lost terminal") 01:42:32 --- part: karingo left #forth 02:41:40 --- join: karingo (karingo@120.portland-15-20rs.or.dial-access.att.net) joined #forth 03:04:41 --- quit: karingo () 07:18:51 --- join: Herkamire (~jason@h000094d30ba2.ne.client2.attbi.com) joined #forth 07:26:15 --- join: arke (~chris@ca-cmrilo-cuda1-c3b-66.vnnyca.adelphia.net) joined #forth 07:31:49 --- quit: onetom (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 07:31:52 --- join: onetom (~tom@cab.bio.u-szeged.hu) joined #forth 07:33:59 terve 07:34:04 wheres Robert? 07:36:06 in sweden 07:36:36 lol 07:36:42 no, i mean, why is he not here? 07:37:18 ask him instead 07:37:46 well, he's not here, so i can't ask him, can I? :) 07:38:14 it's more your problem, isn't it? >;) 07:38:26 have't seen robert for long time, perhaps he's having a vacation? 07:40:22 another vacation? 07:41:24 dont ask me :/ 07:42:22 :) 07:42:34 whats new here? anything from chuck? 08:54:44 --- quit: skylan (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 09:06:28 --- join: skylan (sjh@vickesh01-4659.tbaytel.net) joined #forth 10:35:58 --- join: MrReach (~mrreach@209.181.43.190) joined #forth 10:35:59 --- mode: ChanServ set +o MrReach 10:36:38 hiya, folks 10:39:42 --- join: lma (~markus@lns-p19-9-82-65-92-127.adsl.proxad.net) joined #forth 10:59:06 --- quit: lma (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 11:10:42 manning: I take it you have DSL again? 11:24:50 --- quit: njd (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 11:25:11 --- join: njd (~junk@njd.paradise.net.nz) joined #forth 12:11:52 --- join: slava (~slava@CPE0080ad77a020-CM.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) joined #forth 12:12:03 does it make sense to do continuations (like call-with-current-continuation in scheme) in forth? 12:15:07 hmmm ... I should imagine it would depend on cricumstance 12:15:29 asyncronous i/o is a place I can think of where you might want to do that 12:15:38 --- join: Sonarman (~matt@adsl-64-171-254-92.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net) joined #forth 12:15:42 can you provide more details? 12:15:50 never mind 12:16:06 ok 12:16:51 --- join: I440r (~mark4@12-178.lctv-a5.cablelynx.com) joined #forth 12:17:02 mrreach! 12:17:12 hihi, I440r 12:17:17 :) 12:17:24 are you also mmanning ??? 12:17:35 yes thats me at work 12:17:39 I take it then that you have DSL ? 12:17:41 ah! 12:17:55 so, how are things? 12:17:57 no - mmanning is me at work on a dual t1 or something 12:18:01 and here i have cable 12:18:06 things are ok 12:18:14 heh, some rediculous amount of bandwidth 12:18:16 except im coming to the end of this contract and i do NOT want to leave 12:18:26 i have more bandwidth at home that i do at work 12:18:32 normally 12:18:36 any ideas for product that might keep you employed? 12:18:49 i CAN on occasion download at 100k per second at work. normally its like 30k per second 12:19:07 i dont just want to stay employed, i want to stay HERE lol 12:19:10 lots of times, low-level employees come up with product and service ideas that the company can make money with 12:19:22 ah! 12:19:28 good company? 12:19:33 damn yes 12:19:36 they use forth lol 12:19:52 im having a ball. literally 12:20:01 heh, so did Qualimetrics, but that didn't make THEM a good campany 12:20:06 the code im writing is probably some of the most complex stuff ive ever written 12:20:16 im writing simple solutions to some VERY complex problems 12:20:25 cool 12:20:41 and ive already made them change their design in a number of places in order to get MY code to work lol 12:20:55 tho - the changes were the right way to go... 12:21:23 they have a very complex configureation menu thats like in a tree structure 12:21:26 * MrReach nods 12:21:31 they were hardcoding the tree from the leaf nodes to the root 12:21:37 gotta love linuxconf 12:21:43 *NOT* 12:22:08 they feed me the data and i compile a new tree starting at the root. they can generate the right data for any of their products and i dynamically create the tree 12:22:48 but they had to change alot of their code in order to allow this - also they needed to slightly change the structure of the tree in a number of places 12:23:18 now im working on a rule engine - difficult to explain lol 12:23:25 its taken me two months to understand it 12:23:44 and the RULES themselves are also going to be dynamically generated 12:23:49 for each product 12:23:58 * MrReach nods 12:24:02 when you modify a configuration item a rule runs for it 12:24:11 that rule might say modify some other config item 12:24:16 which will cause another rule to run 12:24:23 actually tho - its not ONE rule per config item 12:24:35 one config item might have 200 rules applied to it 12:24:59 thers like 150 different rule classes and multiple instances of each class of rule 12:25:24 and im writing the code to generate the rule data and execute the rules at run time 12:25:32 maybe another month left 12:25:33 not sure 12:25:40 and not sure if they will keep me on after that 12:25:52 they prolly want to but corporate has their hands tied 12:25:56 which pisses me off 12:26:14 if they offered me a full time job i would take it if it was at or above my minimum 12:26:18 heh, welcome to real life 12:26:21 which for the work im doing is VERY low 12:26:22 yea 12:26:23 lol 12:26:26 reality strikes again 12:27:25 at present, i'm trying to catch up on 3 months of win32for messages 12:28:23 im trying to get in contact with jim schneider 12:28:32 he is very elusive right now 12:28:33 oh? why? 12:28:40 just got a new job in NJ he did 12:28:59 i met him on ircnet one time for like 30 seconds lol 12:29:15 yes, that's what he wrote to the list ... that he'd be out of contact for a week or so while apartment hunting 12:29:30 yes. ive seen him post to the list since then 12:29:31 then he probably was offline while he moved 12:29:41 but i dont think he actually LOOKS at his yahoo email 12:29:49 and ive no idea what his active email address is 12:29:50 now he's probably scarce while adjusting to his new job 12:30:02 just a sec ... 12:32:02 blah ... 12:32:28 :) 12:36:08 was he/is he in n. carolina?? 12:38:03 yea i think so 12:41:08 jpschnei@yahoo.com 12:42:36 yup 12:42:42 but thats his spam address 12:42:54 not one he pays any attention too 12:43:11 his last posting to the win32for email group was on the 30th of Oct (two days ago) 12:43:19 yup 12:43:46 you're certain of that? 12:44:15 ive emailed it a number of times 12:44:59 also, with the move, his email address might have changed 12:45:06 have you googled his name? 12:45:13 yes 12:45:15 lol 12:45:54 that's all the help I can give you 12:45:57 good luck 12:47:13 ya thanc :) 12:47:23 i could post to the group asking him to show up here :P 12:47:59 or asking him to send you an email (and something tantalizing, so he will) 12:48:59 heh, the group is getting ready to move away from the C wrapper in win32forth 12:49:25 but seem COMPLETELY clueless about the opportunities this presents them 12:49:59 BIG time stuff ... like getting rid of the .IMG file ... and resources internal to the .EXE 12:50:13 or cross portability with Linux 12:52:22 wow 12:52:25 that would be cool 12:52:36 i've gotta go in a couple 12:52:38 i mean getting rid of the c :) 12:52:49 yea im not really here, im recovering from being sick 12:52:54 and its like 3 weeks now 12:52:55 grr 12:53:05 well, it's a logical next step 12:53:17 it really cripples win32for 12:53:33 not cripples. just puts it in a niche 12:53:38 windows only 12:53:52 but i'm not sure they have the skill/experience to actually make the change (not that I do) 12:54:18 tom zimmer doesnt do it any more does he 12:54:22 he gave up control of it ? 12:54:25 who owns it now ? 12:54:29 naw ... just watches 12:54:45 :) 12:54:55 he gave it public domain, currently under LGPL i think 12:55:28 aha. that makes it a virus too then 12:55:36 i suspect zimmer is kind of embarrassed of his bastard child 12:55:38 which is why i CANNOT use jim schneiders assembler 12:55:53 i think FPC is far far far better than win32for 12:56:02 and its only 16 bit 12:56:13 he threw win32for together over like a 2 week period ... a total hack 12:56:29 which always sucks 12:56:32 actually 12:56:33 just to see what it would take to run in windows environ 12:56:36 the underlying kernel doesnt suck 12:56:53 then ported LOTS of older tools 12:56:55 its the crap that blobs it onto windows that sucks 12:57:08 well, kernel is "OK" 12:57:16 it's pretty bloated, too 12:57:34 so is isforth - tho - alot of the bloat in isforth is OPTIONS :) 12:57:49 but, once again, another opportunity is provided by writing the .EXE directly 12:58:07 although it would really be win32for anymore 12:58:25 wouldn't, rather 12:59:13 yea i understood the typo heh 12:59:20 kernels are kernels ... 12:59:47 are kernels 12:59:48 a minimal win32forth could be operable with maybe a half-dozen system calls 13:00:03 (using console i/o in win32) 13:01:04 but a forth OOPS coupled with win32 windowing functions is where it really OUGHT to shine 13:01:07 but it doesn't 13:01:38 building an app with gui interface is an undocumented nightmare 13:02:12 lol 13:02:33 have you seen the GUI in swift forth ?> 13:02:38 man does taht SUCK or what 13:02:46 yes, but not the sources for it 13:02:47 forth inc needs to hire some windows coders 13:03:01 not sure the sources are available 13:03:03 I thought it was pretty good, myself 13:03:19 the IDE, anyway 13:03:26 ugh! 13:03:31 its a pile of crap! 13:03:43 the scroll bar alone isnt worth shit 13:03:46 heh, compared to what? 13:03:50 it fucks up lol 13:04:01 you don't see IDEs for forth very often 13:04:38 they dont NEED them 13:04:40 forth IS the ide 13:04:40 win32for has one, so did fpc 13:04:57 fpc didnt 13:05:02 it had an editor 13:05:06 and forth was the ide 13:05:08 well, if you're editing in blocks or files, then an IDE becomes reasonable 13:05:10 thats the way it should be 13:05:50 also, it's becomeing obvious that win32for desperately needs a test suite 13:05:57 write it 13:06:19 I'm going to mention it when I get caught up with the reading 13:06:27 I'll write parts of it 13:07:10 :) 13:07:19 anything worth developing is worth testing :P 13:07:24 the ANS test suite provides a good start 13:07:33 well, what's happening ... 13:07:55 is that most of the older applications make assumptions about dictionary structure 13:08:26 so, as they improve the kernel/basic extensions, they refuse to compile anymore 13:08:49 err applications really shouldnt be messing with dictionary shit at all 13:08:56 yup 13:09:23 but one of the primary objective of the win32for group is that old apps continue to compile properly 13:09:32 ugh 13:09:38 break the morons code 13:09:41 lol 13:09:59 personally, I think that one needs to be dropped, and a standard published about how to write future applications 13:10:02 if the compiler is fucked and an application makes use of a compiler fuckup then the applications deserve to be broken 13:10:30 yes, but there is much to recommend code reusability 13:11:18 not if the code your re-using is broken 13:12:17 well, lots of forth coders forget that there needs to be a line in the sand between system and application 13:12:28 err 13:12:29 no 13:12:33 that the system needs to be considered a black-box 13:12:33 thats the whole point 13:12:36 there is no system 13:12:41 ther is no application 13:12:43 theres FORTH 13:12:48 while writing apps, that is 13:13:03 but still you should observe some guidelines 13:13:09 well, that's the problem that's causing them serious problems 13:13:36 if they make a minor kernel change, all the apps blow up 13:14:27 not too cool 13:15:11 ther are times when i make changes to isforth that applicaitons break 13:15:21 but my KERNEL is purdy much stable now 13:15:27 yes, but is isforth considered "stable"? 13:15:34 mostly 13:15:42 not fully 13:15:58 its still beta 13:16:01 but stable heh 13:16:04 stable beta.... 13:16:05 lol 13:16:24 linux calls that "prerelease" 13:16:44 well thats a misnomer 13:16:53 ive dont some pre-release releases 13:17:05 to individuals only 13:17:14 anything i actually RELEASE is released 13:17:19 but still beta 13:17:51 I was talking linux 13:18:20 anyway, there might be some neat results from the win32for group in the next two years 13:18:34 depending how aggressive they get 13:18:50 who is the lead developer 13:18:57 or isnt there one 13:19:10 well, japeters is considered "the librarian" 13:19:16 that's about it 13:20:01 :) 13:20:13 they've got a pretty good CVS system now ... and that should make an enourmous difference 13:20:28 ooops, didn't intend the pun 13:21:07 lol 13:21:33 all that gives you is traceability 13:21:45 because you NEVER unfold edits to fix bugs 13:21:52 you just change the code further 13:21:52 and the ability to back out of serious mistakes 13:22:00 all cvs gives you is "who did what and when" 13:22:22 i dont use cvs and I can back out of serious mistakes no problem 13:22:29 the bigger mistake is backing out 13:22:38 if a feature you add just simply doesnt work 13:22:38 like "undo XYZ's changes, but leave everything else" 13:22:39 FIX it 13:23:10 i do not believe you can undo a specific change and leave all subsequent changes in place 13:23:38 the assumption there is that the focus is on seperate areas 13:23:59 well actually cvs does give you one other PLUS 13:24:10 it allows 2894623985649 people to all have edits on the same files at the same time 13:24:15 for instance, one person trying to improve the kernel, another extending structures 13:25:23 i thknk the concurrant editing is the only real plus with cvs 13:25:37 and i htink its like HUGELY complex 13:25:44 which is why i use prcs lol 13:25:45 arg! it is 13:26:10 but they've started using a windows suite that extends explorer ... it works beautifully 13:26:42 tortoise 13:26:53 yup ... have you played with it? 13:27:05 right click, "check out" 13:27:19 yes 13:27:32 I *LIKE* it 13:28:07 yes - its good 13:28:17 its got soome glitches but they are working on them :) 13:28:28 in any case ... wifey wants me to go to store ... so gotta go now 13:28:40 --- part: MrReach left #forth 13:43:30 y0 13:43:33 y0 i440r 13:43:50 I440r: got a good site with ansi terminal escape codes? 13:48:39 --- quit: arke ("be back in 2 minutes ...") 13:55:14 --- join: rO| (test123@pD9E59826.dip.t-dialin.net) joined #forth 13:55:57 hello 13:56:25 --- quit: rO| (Client Quit) 13:59:24 --- join: rO| (test123@pD9E59826.dip.t-dialin.net) joined #forth 14:07:54 --- join: arke (~chris@ca-cmrilo-cuda1-c3b-66.vnnyca.adelphia.net) joined #forth 14:41:38 erm 14:41:40 lol 14:41:52 man 5 terminfo 14:42:11 there really is NO good documentation on this 14:42:14 at all 14:43:16 :( 14:43:19 that suxx0rs 14:44:10 yes 14:44:16 what are you trying to do 14:44:38 - locating teh cursor (just an absolute locate is fine) 14:44:41 - colors 14:45:20 thats different in every terminal 14:45:33 :( 14:46:00 you need to use either isforths terminfo stuff or libncurses 14:46:23 well.. isee at-xy 14:46:24 : at-xy 14:46:24 1+ swap 1+ swap ESC[ pn ;pn 72 emit ; ok 14:46:36