00:00:00 --- log: started forth/03.12.22 00:26:06 In my Forth I've made it so that if consumes one argument, even though it inlines its argument. 00:26:19 And I've changed if to be named "then" 00:27:20 So, it goes like: : do.this 1 2 + ; 20 'var' set 'var' get 40 < then do.this 00:28:32 To me it reads more clearly and it forces me to factor more. 00:29:24 I also have: loop.n.times do.this and this week I will probably complete "loop.from.to do.this" and "loop do.this" (with leave) 00:30:09 imaginator, whats your forth ? 00:30:13 Perpheon 00:30:25 <-- isforth 00:30:36 here we go 00:30:39 yes, I know. You're the Linux forth guy. 00:30:45 das me 00:30:51 here we go where ? 00:30:57 ;) 00:30:59 Making looping work properly was a real exercise for me. 00:31:26 is loop an immediate compiling word in your forth ? 00:31:48 I knew I had to push the arguments on the return stack to deal with making loop.n.times re-entrant, but it seemed more complex than it really was. 00:31:59 yes it's immediate. 00:33:13 For example : incr 1 + ; 0 9 loop.n.times incr 00:33:58 loop.n.times turns into a the code WID_LOOP_N_TIMES, and the word following it in the collection is the number of words that follow for the incr word. 00:34:02 you can use loop.n.times outside a : definition ? 00:34:08 yes 00:35:32 cool 00:40:23 If anyone is curious: http://www.xmission.com/~georgeps/Perpheon/Perpheon-96.zip 00:41:02 wish8.4 fed_bld.tcl in src will start the IDE I use to build it. 00:52:01 I have planned to make Perpheon eventually support multitasking, but it will not be cooperative like most Forths. 00:52:45 In my current design I would fork() a timer process that communicates with the main process via a pipe. 00:53:30 And the timer process would send interupts via kill() that would trigger a signal handler. 00:53:50 It would also write to the pipe the id of the task that should be triggered. 00:54:49 How have other Forth's dealt with multitasking that isn't like the standard Forth method? 00:55:36 isforth will use fork and clone im thinking 00:56:38 hmm, maybe clone() would be better. NetBSD emulates clone(), and OpenBSD has rfork() which does most of what clone() does. 00:57:16 How were you planning to do it with fork and clone? 00:57:18 well isforth will run in fbsd with linux emulation 00:57:24 not planning yet heh 00:57:31 just an idea for the future 00:59:39 * Serg loops another way 01:00:00 20 REP SOMEWORD 01:00:04 i think ill add rep to isforth 01:00:07 it looks neat 01:00:10 If I use clone() then I could possibly save some memory, but fork() is CoW with most systems now. 01:00:32 which systems dont do copy on write ? 01:00:39 old most likely 01:01:07 i would prefer NO copy on write - i.e. 100% shared code/data between tasks 01:01:43 Well as clone() is used to make pthreads that sounds like the right thing for you. 01:01:54 yup 01:02:49 20 REP SOMEWORD is interesting. I read once that Charles Moore loops by invoking the current word, or something like that rather than adding any looping word. 01:03:09 That was in a more recent Forth he built though. Possibly ColorForth. 01:03:17 --- quit: Robert (Remote closed the connection) 01:03:24 --- join: Robert (~snofs@c-b75a71d5.17-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) joined #forth 01:03:40 robert when are you going to do isforth a web page 01:04:06 Prolog deals with looping like that. Function calls in Prolog use tail-recursion, so they don't overflow the stack. 01:07:11 For instance: foo(A) :- A > 9, B is A + 1, foo(B). 01:09:20 :- is like if, and "," is like AND. 01:14:47 chuck is also against adding more words than needed heh 01:16:15 Some people tell me Forth is insane, and that he has a lot of crazy ideas. 01:16:39 ? 01:16:42 you mean Chuck? 01:16:46 not Forth 01:16:46 yes 01:16:51 well both 01:16:55 hehe 01:17:33 there are a lot of descriptions of crazy 01:17:44 one is unusual and out of the ordinary 01:17:55 obsession 01:18:18 the other two are mad/insane and full of cracks/flaws 01:18:49 so I guess it depends on which crazy people think he/forth is 01:18:53 I think the former 01:19:12 Well, the fellow that told me that used to chat here I believe. 01:19:40 I was talking with some friends about a paper Moore wrote, and he mentioned it. 01:19:41 if it were full of cracks and flaws and if Chuck were mad/insane he wouldn't have developed all of what he has and done so successfully nor would he be paying bills and be with his wife 01:19:46 chuck is an artist 01:20:06 he might be insane but he is VERY clear thinking 01:20:26 brb - trying 2.6.0 01:20:34 --- quit: I440r ("Leaving") 01:21:03 I think clear thinking and insanity go against each other 01:21:25 I've never met the guy but from his work and other work related to it, I can tell he is not full of shit 01:21:40 I like Moore's work and I don't think he's insane. 01:21:54 good 01:22:45 I love how he can see the algorithm in problems. 01:22:56 Like the ColorForth example he gave of a disk driver. 01:23:04 ide driver? 01:23:06 4 or 5 lines 01:23:11 yes, brilliant heh 01:23:11 I think that was it. 01:23:17 www.colorforth.com/ide.html 01:23:28 5 lines 01:24:14 --- join: I440r (~mark4@12-160.lctv-a5.cablelynx.com) joined #forth 01:24:27 I hope that someday I can write code like that. 01:24:38 wb I440r 01:24:41 well that didnt work lol 01:24:52 What's wrong with 2.6.0? 01:24:55 write code like what ? 01:25:06 Like Moore's IDE disk driver in ColorForth 01:25:11 something to do with fram buffer - all i get is a blank screen :/ 01:25:50 yeah, I agree 01:25:56 I'll be attempting to do so in my system 01:27:34 ree: what is your system? 01:27:56 two parts 01:28:11 a distributed network os and then network projects based on top 01:28:34 cool 01:28:49 forth sort of fits in between as an intermediate interactive development system for generating machine code (as an editor/assembler) 01:28:57 TCP/IP in Forth? 01:28:57 i cant fscking read that 01:29:01 and then it will also be integrated into the development network project 01:29:02 thats impossible to understand 01:29:11 what is? 01:29:14 i would also like to see some SOURCES for colorforth 01:29:22 "assembler" sources 01:29:27 color.asm 01:29:30 Well I got some somewhere. 01:29:30 not manually constructed opcode encodings 01:29:36 hmm 01:29:38 color.asm is gobbldegook 01:29:40 http://www.colorforth.com/install.htm 01:29:44 ahh 01:30:23 imaginator, more like assembled from forth 01:31:09 color.asm makes sense to me 01:31:25 thers no assembler pneumonics in there 01:31:33 ide.html isn't too hard either 01:31:36 imaginator: http://snaga.inbox.ru 01:31:42 its all $55 5 shift lefft or with this xor with that comma it in... 01:31:43 bullshit 01:31:45 ? 01:31:47 what? 01:31:49 20 rep someword and much more 01:32:06 the assembler primatives are TOTALLY unreadable 01:32:08 there is a lot of assembly code in it 01:32:12 err ! 01:32:13 err 01:32:16 since when 01:32:19 imaginator: http://snaga.narod.ru 01:32:21 every line 01:32:27 every source file i can find on there is totally unreadable 01:32:28 ftp://ftp.ultratechnology.com/COLOR.ASM 01:32:30 give me a url for that 01:32:46 it's 100% legible 01:32:53 no. i was looking at the one on chucks site 01:33:04 that is pointed to on chuck's site 01:33:09 the only version that is 01:33:31 perhaps the older version(s) were like that 01:34:02 there have been ports already to windows and xfree86 01:34:05 Serg: I'll take a look. 01:34:21 two from complete amateurs 01:34:32 (as stated on their project pages) 01:34:58 * Serg dislikes ColorForth for not being 'UNIX way' : processing of text streams 01:35:11 ok, THOSE sources are PISS POOR too 01:35:13 no fucking comments 01:35:26 im not even going to bother looking at a source file if the author is too dumb to comment it 01:35:34 i dont care if it IS chuck moors sources 01:35:53 * Serg writes no comment code too ;(( 01:35:56 how does he ever expect ANYONE to take colorforth seriously if he cant COMMENT! 01:36:11 ? 01:36:14 wtf? 01:36:22 what is the importance of comments in asm code?? 01:36:24 theres absolutely NO comments in that file what so ever 01:36:34 Some people have understood it well enough to make it run within Windows. 01:36:41 it's imperative! 01:36:57 the sorucces look like an unmader bed 01:36:59 none of his code uses macros or functions spread throughout five thousand files like those in other HLL 01:37:07 nobody writes decent source code any more 01:37:17 its all so fcuking untydy and disjointed and UGLY 01:37:26 you don't really need to comment assembly code.. especially if it uses no macros and exists entirely in one file 01:37:27 ASM w/o '; ' is wasted time 01:37:27 im not going to fight to understand someones scratchings 01:37:33 re3e thats utter bullshit 01:37:41 COMPLETE and utter bullshit 01:37:44 wtf 01:37:47 you guys are weird 01:37:56 nope that's just I440r :) 01:37:57 it's nice to have comments 01:38:03 but come on 01:38:15 it doesn't make source illegible if you don't have it 01:38:22 I440r: let some steam out, don't flame please ! 01:38:25 especially with such code as this 01:38:47 that code is butt ugly 01:39:05 it truely annoys me when coders write messy sources - its like they dont give a fuck 01:39:22 I440r have you emailed him to ask if he has some design plans or comments? 01:39:30 --- quit: Robert (Remote closed the connection) 01:39:41 --- join: Robert (~snofs@c-b75a71d5.17-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) joined #forth 01:39:51 no. im not following colorforth, im about " <-- this interested in it right now 01:40:09 --- join: schihei (~schihei@pD95487B5.dip.t-dialin.net) joined #forth 01:40:09 sigh 01:40:39 if the sources looked like they were actually FORMATTED with consistency and had COMMENTS in them then i would take an interest 01:41:05 but ive absolutely no interest what so ever in wasting my time trying to wade through that sort of crap 01:41:16 * Serg thinks ColorForth is a lossage coz overall concept, not coz lack of comments 01:41:22 i dont care HOW good the compiled code is, the source is BAD 01:41:32 why Serg? 01:41:36 thats part of the reason i avoid all contact with c soruces 01:41:46 I think imperative source can be as ugly as it wants 01:41:50 * Serg dislikes ColorForth for not being 'UNIX way' : processing of text streams 01:41:56 ohh my god 01:42:00 * ree just had a stroke 01:42:03 heh 01:42:14 it's like I am in another world here 01:42:26 in what world ? 01:42:54 high level/general purpose application operating system/pretty code means more than functioning code world 01:42:54 why can't i say: cforth because as you probably know, chuck thinks forth should be a system itself 01:43:34 and hates competing "standards" 01:43:41 hmmm.... 01:43:46 he is right only... 01:43:52 he is right 01:43:54 for embedded-like cases 01:44:23 like PC dedicated to xmas-tree blink controller 01:45:42 Interesting: debug: ... mov EAX, God 01:46:41 * Serg is atheist 01:46:49 That's from COLOR.ASM I guess he has a sense of humor. 01:47:18 Does God stand for Global offset d? 01:48:08 Serg: atheism is popular in Russia isn't it? 01:48:12 ree: for general use, we need general purpose OS 01:48:40 imaginator: yes, rather 'scientific approach' to anything, incl. religious issues 01:48:56 praise to our good total EDU 01:49:23 what's being ruined by fu... moneybag goats at power 01:50:11 they need cattle, not free-thinking citizens 01:50:47 serg, we don't need an os period 01:50:47 Well, even if you don't believe in a god I think most people that read books like Proverbs would agree it contains wisdom 01:50:58 we don't need programmers either 01:51:05 we just need users I believe 01:51:12 but that is outside chuck's philosophy 01:51:24 the point is what chuck needs 01:51:35 or what you need or what I need 01:51:38 heh, how da hell will you IRC or EMAIL or draw funny pics w/o OS ??? 01:51:57 how 'll you support different hardw ?? 01:52:13 in colorforth you would develop them separately of any intending os 01:52:23 portability is not considered in forth 01:52:27 have drivers 4 every proggie, like for Autocad and 3DS in DOS times ? 01:52:36 that mega suxxx !!! 01:52:40 How would you multitask? 01:52:49 tasking would be built in 01:53:05 I am not a fan of the approach chuck proposes for general purpose usage.. but that is just it 01:53:12 chuck doesn't propose it for general purpose use 01:53:15 I guess it is about data processing, and not programs, so an OS is somewhat pointless from that perspective. 01:53:15 he does it for his own use 01:53:21 i say NO to it ;(( 01:53:23 I'm sure chuck has a windows PC at home too 01:53:35 i stand for UNIX, but... 01:53:36 The original Apple system that used Smalltalk didn't have programs. 01:53:47 It was more do this task, and do that task as I understand it. 01:54:02 simplify and rethink it Forth way 01:54:10 I stand for getting rid of all PC installations, programming languages, and software development cycles 01:54:15 turn users into developers 01:54:27 using their method of development 01:54:28 damn ! 01:54:30 not anyone elses 01:54:40 not your method, not XYZ general purpose os's method 01:54:42 but their method 01:54:50 if my managers will code and won't sell... 01:54:50 let them have full control 01:54:54 If we ever do develop a great Forth system we could build translators that would convert all of those massive programs for Windows to function at least to a certain extent in a Forth system. 01:54:58 i won't get my salary ;(((( 01:54:59 and in a way, forth is about that 01:55:13 forth isn't about forth even 01:55:19 instead of having general pupose methods just have one operating system so you only ever have ONE method for anything 01:55:25 lets pick windows! 01:55:27 chuck always says, it is about the problem 01:55:37 you're completely ignoring everything 01:55:40 i440r 01:55:44 lol 01:55:52 i was being funny not serious :) 01:55:53 I just said that general purpose systems have exactly that, their own method for doing XYZ 01:56:08 when everyone should be able to use their own procedure for going about doing something 01:56:15 without any cruft or unwanted features 01:56:25 so that is my goal 01:56:56 replace the middle men, the programmer, the general purpose os, and finally the PC 01:57:13 make everything into dumb terminals that let people connect to a large development network 01:57:25 and let them get on with their work 01:57:44 ree: revolution suxx, evolution rulez 01:57:54 wrong 01:58:05 we don't hardly have enough revolution at all in computer science 01:58:15 UNIX and Windows are crap compared to what could be accomplished 01:58:21 PCs are crap 01:58:30 so do non-crap ! 01:58:38 forth itself is crap.. and chuck wouldn't disagree most likely 01:58:39 They design PCs for the OS now. 01:58:49 err i dont think i would like that 01:58:58 thats like big brother 01:59:03 make a good comp and write good code 4 it ;)) 01:59:10 the master machine everyone uses 01:59:13 control is an illusion i440r 01:59:24 If we could have a massive dictionary of words shared by every programmer on Earth just imagine. 01:59:25 big brother controls what you see, here, eat, sleep on, think 01:59:27 here/hear 01:59:31 i suppose privacy is too 01:59:35 PCs, general purpose oses 01:59:39 * Serg agrees w/ I440r 01:59:42 they are created by big brother: society 01:59:43 * Serg agrees w I440r 01:59:58 imaginator, yes, you're getting the idea 02:00:02 imaginator, except in a forth way 02:00:04 * Serg is AFK 02:00:35 but it wouldn't have to be identical to every other shared word 02:00:43 it could be 100% custom to each individual 02:00:57 wow 02:01:10 We could accomplish so much. 02:01:13 that is what is great about breaking away from standards and building systems that support such capabilities 02:02:47 people become people, individuals once again 02:02:50 not just consumers 02:22:49 --- join: MrReach (~mrreach@209.181.43.190) joined #forth 02:23:05 hihi! 02:23:12 Hi MrReach 02:23:23 hey mrreach 02:23:26 mrreach!!! :) 02:23:37 ree: you have interesting ideas. 02:23:37 heh 02:23:58 I picture a future where almost everyone knows how to create computer programs. 02:24:01 just had a massive paradigm shift regarding dis/assemblers 02:24:11 mrreach how so ? 02:24:34 better make sure there's strongly typed languages about, imaginator 02:24:55 ree: it sound as though you do too. 02:24:57 well, I had started out like every other forth assembler ... 02:25:03 mrreach study my 8051 assembler ??? 02:25:19 comming opcodes and the storing them with DOES> clauses 02:25:31 right 02:25:36 oh! hell! didn't check my mail today ... sorry 02:25:40 lol 02:25:46 did i email it to you ? 02:25:49 i ferget lol 02:26:01 and then using a table driven disassembler 02:26:31 right - my 8051 disassembler is definatly table driven :) 02:26:31 heh 02:27:06 I think (and this is just a first pass thought) that it might be hugely easier to write and reread if both are combined into one file 02:27:25 i had thunked about that 02:27:30 that are broken into sections, one for each mnemonic 02:27:36 but disassembly and assembly are so vastly different 02:27:52 they require much of the same info, though 02:28:02 mostly flags about addressing types 02:28:20 imaginator, yeah, but without using language other than their own (natural language) or visually 02:28:25 but one constructs the info - the other one uses the info to construct a display of the instruciton 02:28:44 correct 02:28:47 i dont think you could create a mapping between the two that could be used by both the assemblrer and the disassembler 02:28:58 i would be very interestd if you could :) 02:29:01 like I said, it just occured to me, haven't given it much thought 02:29:21 it would be an awesome assembler/disassembler 02:29:27 i'm not so much interested in reusing data ... 02:29:38 i had thunked of it before but i dont think i could create it 02:29:46 as in making the code code crystal clear and understandable 02:30:07 assemblers are famous for being obtuse :P 02:30:11 it would probably take roughly the same bytes and processor cycles 02:30:12 obfuscated even 02:30:31 yeah, especially the forth ones 02:30:36 :) 02:30:49 that and metacompiling people just don't seem to get 02:31:40 i dont get meta compiling yet 02:31:42 even with pygmy, which is brilliantly simple, I had to take the assembler as a black box and trust that it worked properly 02:32:03 --- quit: Robert (Remote closed the connection) 02:32:08 --- join: Robert (~snofs@c-b75a71d5.17-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) joined #forth 02:32:09 which it didn't with far calls, btw, which I lost two days figuring out 02:32:40 pygmy is old school - dos 16 bit heh 02:32:50 the good old days 02:33:06 yep, probably the one I understood best, though 02:33:16 odd as it was 02:33:28 yup 02:33:46 mine was always fpc but there were huge areas i didnt even WANT to look at 02:33:50 like the editor 02:33:55 yep 02:34:02 and the assembler 02:34:05 same with the editor in win32forth 02:34:08 good old days? 02:34:13 heh 02:34:26 it's a nasty-ass mess 02:34:50 80s/90s 02:34:59 i was seriously disappointed with tom zimmer when he went the windows way 02:35:10 I440r: so what stopped you from using a similar approach? 02:35:11 it was like "ugh" 02:35:25 a similar approach to what ? 02:35:27 Windows: 90% PCs 02:35:38 Linux: 1-4% 02:35:39 and falling 02:35:44 and growing 02:35:44 to combined dis/assembler 02:36:05 because i couldnt figure out a mapping that would work in both directions 02:36:22 windows has its place, so does linux/freebsd 02:36:48 windows only has a place as you call it because its IN YOUR FACE 02:36:54 you cant get rid of the fskcing virus :P 02:36:57 who is serg? 02:37:03 serg_penguin 02:37:12 russian forth coder :) 02:37:22 been semi regular in here for ages :)O 02:37:23 not Seargent? 02:37:26 more so recently 02:37:32 ok 02:37:37 no i called him seargant penguin today to heh 02:38:14 wondows has suppior font layout, mutimedia, and hardware detection 02:38:35 but not stable enough for mission-critical stuff 02:39:00 the ONLY reason windows has superiour hardware detection is because hardware manufacturees are PAID by microsoft not to release their specs 02:39:01 not stable enough? 02:39:02 heh 02:39:16 um 02:39:19 wow 02:39:21 ree: you disagree? 02:39:29 that is such fud I can't believe you said it I440r 02:39:35 paid not to release specs? 02:39:38 they don't release specs because of competition 02:39:49 mrreach, depends on the mission obviously 02:39:54 ree i truely believe that microsoft and hardware ppl are in cahoots 02:39:57 ree: no, that doesn't fly 02:40:09 ? 02:40:17 there are a few mission critical devices that run windows 02:40:26 if I make peripherals, I want to be able to sell them to both windows and *nix users 02:40:28 probably in the thousands 02:40:38 wrong 02:40:44 you don't care about a crappy market of 1% 02:40:48 mrreach then why wont broadcom etc release their specs to the linux crowd 02:40:57 even less if you consider you don't get all of that market in sales 02:40:57 simple - microsoft askede them not to 02:41:03 I don't put my efforts to the 1%, certainly 02:41:04 heh 02:41:08 microsoft asked them to? 02:41:13 NOT to 02:41:24 companies have hard enough time making drivers for windows 02:41:26 *not 02:41:31 but Microsoft forced them to sign an NDA on their bastardised version of the USB spec 02:41:41 many companies have drivers for multiple systems 02:41:52 hell, even microsoft sells software/devices that work on different computers 02:41:55 and operating systems 02:41:58 it took the linux coders two years to figure out how it was set up 02:42:08 it took them that long because ask geist 02:42:12 was it USB or PCI??? 02:42:15 who codes on such systems 02:42:31 USB is a highly capable and complex transport 02:42:36