00:00:00 --- log: started forth/05.05.29 00:01:24 teh hies 00:02:40 sup 00:02:49 nothing much 00:02:51 just got home 00:02:56 gonna do some coding 00:03:04 (console routines for retroforth) 00:03:26 I440r: :) 00:06:22 werd. 00:37:11 hmm 00:37:44 what's the word to get at the value of a dictionary entry with a DOES>? 01:02:56 eh? 01:02:59 what do you mean? 01:05:04 --- join: snoopy_1711 (~snoopy_16@dsl-084-058-013-196.arcor-ip.net) joined #forth 01:10:17 arke: I've got words that were created with a DOES> .. I want to find out their parameter field value. 01:12:10 eh 01:13:01 you mean like : constant create , does> @ ; 01:13:30 --- quit: Snoopy42 (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 01:13:43 --- nick: snoopy_1711 -> Snoopy42 01:14:25 arke: yah, I want to find out the value that was stuck in the paramter field with , 01:14:56 if I can't cleanly, I'll just change my does> code to check out the state things are in. 01:27:36 Oh, I see 01:27:48 you're asking how to do DOES> 01:28:00 right? 01:35:46 oh, no 01:35:59 I know how to do DOES> but I'm saying if I have something like this.. 01:37:00 : myvar create , does> @ ; .. is there a clean way to get at the parameter field, without the does> code being run on it. 01:37:18 I'm writing a compiler for my AVR forth.. and I want to come up with the cleanest way to implement some functionality. 01:37:43 hrm 01:37:52 i think its best to stick with does> there 01:37:58 I cant think of anything 01:38:00 :) 01:40:22 okay. :) 01:40:27 I know there's a way, I just can't remember. 01:40:47 hrm, for some reason my board's version of 'execute' doesn't work. 02:04:19 : execute >r ; 02:04:22 :)) 02:19:36 yah, well I barely have the forth kernel up.. that'll have to wait. ;) 02:25:35 :) 02:26:27 the problem has nothing to do with the forth aspect.. the board is rebooting even if I assemble the icall by hand. 02:27:29 od 02:27:31 odd* 02:27:34 it hates you 02:27:35 :) 02:28:04 haha 02:28:07 I just figured it out. 02:28:09 fucking program. 02:28:29 instruction address space is 16 bits per word.. SRAM is 8 bits per word 02:29:37 awesome, my execute word works. 02:31:42 :) 03:04:22 okay 03:04:25 my umbilical forth works 03:04:45 with a really simple interpreter on the board, and an execute word. 03:12:52 :) 03:16:07 how long does your interpreter takes to lookup a word? 03:27:57 there's no lookup on the board 03:28:08 all word addressing is done on the host right now 03:33:22 I'm bootstrapping things by assembling in another forth, and then programming from the flash image: 03:39:17 mark 03:39:17 w>word /rcall 03:39:17 wexecute /rcall 03:39:17 41 pushi wemit /rcall 03:39:17 relpos /rjmp 03:39:23 that's basically my interpreter loop 03:50:45 hah 03:50:54 I just realized my parameter stack is growing up not down. 03:54:20 :) 03:59:10 fixed. 03:59:21 this shit actually works 03:59:23 I'm amazed. 03:59:36 :) 04:11:17 --- join: Robert (~snofs@c-f778e055.17-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) joined #forth 04:50:25 --- join: Raystm2 (~vircuser@adsl-68-93-41-224.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth 05:07:33 --- quit: alexander_ (Remote closed the connection) 05:25:15 --- quit: madgarden (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 05:27:32 --- join: qFox (~C00K13S@92pc222.sshunet.nl) joined #forth 05:36:04 Hi3 05:36:06 Hi. 05:37:15 hey 06:18:35 --- quit: saon|smgl ("Lost terminal") 06:29:01 --- join: madgarden (~madgarden@Toronto-HSE-ppp3708127.sympatico.ca) joined #forth 06:30:18 Hi. 06:59:36 --- quit: madgarden ("*frotz*") 07:06:05 --- join: madgarden (~madgarden@Toronto-HSE-ppp3708127.sympatico.ca) joined #forth 07:40:05 --- join: Topaz (~somebody@spc1-horn1-6-0-cust117.cosh.broadband.ntl.com) joined #forth 07:47:01 --- join: saon|smgl (~saon@c-66-177-224-130.hsd1.fl.comcast.net) joined #forth 08:24:28 --- join: Robert__ (~snofs@c-f778e055.17-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) joined #forth 08:24:34 --- quit: Topaz ("Leaving") 08:38:22 --- quit: Robert (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 08:46:44 --- nick: Robert__ -> Robert 08:47:29 --- join: Robert__ (~snofs@c-f778e055.17-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) joined #forth 08:55:31 --- quit: Robert (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 09:07:16 --- nick: Robert__ -> Robert 09:11:45 --- join: solar_angel (~jenni@CPE0000e812679b-CM000a7362da55.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) joined #forth 09:12:23 Hi. 09:13:29 hello :) 09:25:38 --- join: AlexF (~Alex@196-220.suscom-maine.net) joined #forth 09:44:50 --- quit: KB1FYR (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 09:48:25 --- join: Robert__ (~snofs@c-f778e055.17-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) joined #forth 10:00:25 --- quit: Robert (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 10:00:31 --- nick: Robert__ -> Robert 10:47:09 --- join: Al2O3 (~Al2O3@c-24-1-126-202.hsd1.tx.comcast.net) joined #forth 11:16:39 --- quit: vitaminmoo ("Leaving") 11:20:19 --- join: vitaminmoo (~vitaminmo@dsl-95-113.peak.org) joined #forth 11:36:55 --- join: KB1FYR (~Alex@196-220.suscom-maine.net) joined #forth 11:43:40 --- quit: AlexF (Read error: 113 (No route to host)) 11:46:20 --- join: tathi (~josh@pcp01375108pcs.milfrd01.pa.comcast.net) joined #forth 11:49:24 --- quit: virl (Read error: 131 (Connection reset by peer)) 11:52:39 --- join: virl (anonymous@chello062178085149.1.12.vie.surfer.at) joined #forth 12:02:07 --- quit: solar_angel ("*slips out quietly*") 12:28:36 --- quit: Frek ("Client exiting") 12:28:46 --- join: Frek (~anvil@h254n2fls31o815.telia.com) joined #forth 12:30:02 --- quit: Raystm2 ("User pushed the X - because it's Xtra, baby") 12:52:44 --- quit: Frek ("Client exiting") 13:00:18 --- quit: qFox ("this quit is sponsored by somebody!") 13:06:24 --- join: Frek (~anvil@h254n2fls31o815.telia.com) joined #forth 13:10:08 Any idea why the 6810 has 6 different chip select pins? 13:26:17 for fun and profit 13:32:31 to confuse those seeking to use it... 13:34:33 maybe it has hyperthreading, and thinks it is really 6 different processors 13:35:46 Hah. 13:36:01 Yeah.. a 70s RAM chip with hyperthreading... 13:36:08 * Robert takes notes. 13:39:14 :) 13:51:55 :) 14:02:41 * Robert found some more cool chips. 14:03:21 --- join: [Forth] (~Forth@rrcs-24-242-160-169.sw.biz.rr.com) joined #forth 14:03:22 2716 EPROM, model 1979 in ceramic package... 6802 CPU. 6167 SRAM ;) 14:03:26 --- quit: [Forth] (Client Quit) 14:04:03 Hehe 14:06:11 --- join: [Forth] (~Forth@rrcs-24-242-160-169.sw.biz.rr.com) joined #forth 14:08:59 --- quit: [Forth] (Client Quit) 14:15:38 --- quit: Robert ("Night") 14:15:45 alalala 14:15:46 alalala 14:19:40 hi arke :) 14:19:59 --- join: danniken (CapStone@ppp-70-247-75-6.dsl.ltrkar.swbell.net) joined #forth 14:20:35 --- quit: danniken (Client Quit) 14:20:49 hi tathi 14:20:50 :) 14:21:07 dan!!! 14:21:12 * arke is working on console routines for retroforth 14:21:15 argh i missed him 14:21:17 I440r_!!!!!11111oneoneoneone 14:21:38 i missed danniken 14:21:39 grrr 14:21:43 I440r_: hey, uuh, escape sequences are a pain 14:21:45 how long was he here ? 14:21:52 no. only in screen 14:21:53 1 minute 14:21:56 foo 14:22:02 no they always are 14:22:03 :) 14:22:29 why would I have to reset all attributes to clear one? 14:22:32 its non-sensical 14:23:00 thats not the escape sequences fault 14:23:07 thats the fuckheads that create terminfo files 14:23:33 most terminals support both the sgr (reset ONE attrib) and the sgr0 (reset ALL attribs) 14:23:39 but they only give a format string for sgr0 14:23:43 which is fucking stupid 14:24:07 if the terminal supports a given sequence they should fucking give a format string for that sequence in its terminfo file 14:24:09 period 14:24:23 the fact that they dont makes terminfo BRAINDEAD 14:24:25 and them too 14:24:48 well, im not using terminfo anyway 14:24:49 VT100 14:24:57 which has the saime brain deadedness 14:25:08 vt100 supports the sgr i believe 14:25:38 you can reset a specific attribute with an sgr 14:25:43 eh 14:25:45 link? 14:25:52 err link to what ? 14:25:54 lol 14:25:56 because I didnt see that when I was looking for that yesterday 14:25:59 man 5 terminfo 14:26:08 oh 14:26:37 there has to be a doc on the vt100 detailing all the escape sequences it suppoorts 14:26:52 oh wait 14:27:03 ESC[Ps;...;Psm 14:27:03 Set Graphics Mode: Calls the graphics functions specified by the 14:27:03 following values. These specified functions remain active until the next 14:27:03 occurrence of this escape sequence. Graphics mode changes the colors and 14:27:03 attributes of text (such as bold and underline) displayed on the 14:27:05 screen. 14:27:21 looks to me like its saying I need to reemit all each time there is a change 14:27:25 ....this makes my life easier 14:27:49 you're teh expert, will that work? 14:28:26 esc[0;..modes..m 14:28:35 aah, isee 14:28:40 :) 14:28:40 this makes my life MUCH easier 14:28:58 if only terminfo ppl would put a FUCKING format string in there for the sgr 14:29:16 if only they could make something a little easier in general 14:30:01 also it would be nice if they also included format strings for all the fucking possible keypresses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14:30:13 Oh yes, that would be nice. 14:30:18 *sigh* 14:30:24 including shift, alt, control, shift+alt, shift+control, shift+alt+control, alt+control 14:30:39 of corse, a terminfo file would then be 256k in size 14:30:54 shift+alt+control+esc+meta4+b ..... emacs might need it ;) 14:32:27 erm 14:32:29 whats emacs ? 14:32:31 :) 14:33:43 I hope you were kidding :) 14:34:03 * arke hates emacs 14:34:18 --- join: TheDarkBlueWiz (TheBlueWiz@ts001d0585.wdc-dc.xod.concentric.net) joined #forth 14:34:59 hi TBW :) 14:35:10 lol 14:35:13 you turned evil! 14:35:24 haha 14:35:33 tbw has gone over to the dark side 14:36:46 hiya arke and I440r....yup...I'm on the dark side now 14:37:12 lol 14:37:28 * I440r_ raises his 2 wooden stakes into the shape of a cross 14:37:31 stand back! 14:37:57 * TheDarkBlueWiz ignites his lightsaber and slashes the wooden cross into pieces! 14:38:27 damn 14:38:42 --- mode: crc set +v TheDarkBlueWiz 14:38:46 * arke puts on black coat and sunglasses 14:38:49 :) 14:39:45 * TheDarkBlueWiz laughs darkly 14:39:58 * TheDarkBlueWiz extinguishes his lightsaber 14:40:16 --- mode: crc set -v TheDarkBlueWiz 14:40:47 --- join: [Forth] (~Forth@rrcs-24-242-160-169.sw.biz.rr.com) joined #forth 14:40:51 --- quit: [Forth] (Client Quit) 14:41:08 :) 14:42:43 heh...well, how's life? Mine's going fine these days 14:44:40 not so bad 14:44:52 trying to work on isforth 14:45:41 * TheDarkBlueWiz nods...then remembers his offer to work on x86...hasn't the chance :P 14:46:19 --- join: [Forth] (~Forth@rrcs-24-242-160-169.sw.biz.rr.com) joined #forth 14:46:45 --- quit: [Forth] (Remote closed the connection) 14:46:52 --- join: [Forth] (~Forth@rrcs-24-242-160-169.sw.biz.rr.com) joined #forth 14:46:58 blah 14:47:54 heh >-] 14:51:21 that blah was to test the bot btw lol 14:51:42 --- quit: [Forth] (Remote closed the connection) 14:52:17 oh...so I take it that [Forth] is the bot you're referring to? 14:52:56 ya 14:55:55 mmhmm...I guess it keeps kicking the bucket....I have a Python based IRC bot script that does differentiation 14:56:06 nice :) 14:58:43 I'm starting it up (I just located my bot script :) 14:58:54 --- join: diffbot (~diffbot@ts001d0585.wdc-dc.xod.concentric.net) joined #forth 15:00:21 diffbot: sin(x)^5 15:00:21 5*cos(x)*sin(x)^4 15:00:27 :) 15:01:04 diffbot: ln(x^3) 15:01:05 3*x^2/x^3 15:01:45 fun :) 15:01:50 it can't do any fancy algebraic simplifications 15:02:06 but it is fun....it is written entirely in Python 15:02:44 I did that to learn how to code up IRC bot 15:03:38 * tathi hasn't coded an IRC bot yet :) 15:06:00 it's surprisingly easy...though it does require a good string manipulation facility, which Python excels at 15:07:46 --- join: Raystm2 (~vircuser@adsl-68-93-41-224.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth 15:08:42 hiya Raystm2 15:10:01 Hello, TheDarkBlueWiz, whatcha been up to? 15:10:25 * Raystm2 being very self-indulgent with the long weekend 15:10:45 chillin', playing a bit with diffbot (my bot here), and my usual chattin' with my buddy in private channel 15:10:50 :) 15:10:56 neither have i really, [Forth] doesnt count yet lol 15:11:13 been booting and beta testing colorforth images for a few of the community what have new thingies to play with. 15:26:45 --- quit: Raystm2 ("User pushed the X - because it's Xtra, baby") 15:32:45 * TheDarkBlueWiz dismisses his bot 15:32:45 --- quit: diffbot ("Quit") 15:33:01 gotta go...bye all! 15:33:15 --- part: TheDarkBlueWiz left #forth 16:47:17 --- join: Raystm2 (~vircuser@adsl-68-93-41-224.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth 16:48:22 --- quit: virl (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)) 16:49:31 --- quit: Raystm2 (Client Quit) 17:48:00 This needs a Forth! http://www.maushammer.com/vmu.html 18:25:50 --- join: [Forth] (~Forth@rrcs-24-242-160-169.sw.biz.rr.com) joined #forth 18:28:06 --- quit: [Forth] (Client Quit) 18:36:26 --- quit: KB1FYR (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)) 18:37:17 --- join: KB1FYR (~Alex@196-220.suscom-maine.net) joined #forth 19:27:59 im running my mmtest on a VERY SLOW box heh 19:41:50 --- join: KB1FYR|LT (~Alex@196-220.suscom-maine.net) joined #forth 20:36:33 --- quit: tathi ("leaving") 20:48:08 --- quit: I440r ("Leaving") 21:03:18 --- join: alexander_ (~alexander@69.17.112.153) joined #forth 21:03:18 hey 21:03:48 can someone verify if this behavior is correct.. 21:03:50 should this work: 21:04:01 vocabulary test1 ok 21:04:01 create buf 16 1024 * allot ok 21:04:01 vocabulary test2 ok 21:04:01 vocs 21:07:50 21:07:54 because it totally jacks up gforth 21:08:05 dunno 21:08:10 i dont like vocabularies 21:08:35 yah, I'm beginning to not like them because they don't seem to work. 21:08:59 if I create a vocab, and then allot a chunk of dictionary, and create another one, it totally breaks. 21:12:33 what is vocs supposed to do 21:12:37 list the vocabularies 21:13:01 the above should work just fine if gforth wasnt fucked up to begin with 21:13:05 it's more fucked than just vocs breaking.. if I try to use test2, all hell breaks loose. 21:13:19 but you do realise that just because you have created a vocabulary doesnt mean all new definitions are going to go IN that vocabulary ? 21:13:26 vocabulary foo 21:13:29 yah, I'm not expecting them too 21:13:36 foo definitions 21:13:37 this is a test case for a bigger problem I ran into 21:13:53 solution is to stop using NON forths 21:13:55 try isforth 21:13:59 NON forths? 21:14:03 or non-forths? 21:14:10 gforth isnt 21:14:13 how isn't it? 21:14:22 can it metacompile its own sources ? 21:14:28 no, but neither can pforth 21:14:34 will it ever be able to metacompile its own sources? 21:14:56 any forth that cannot possibly compile its own soruces is NOT a forth 21:14:59 haha 21:15:00 its an abomination 21:15:04 I440r_: when will isforth be able to metacompile itself? 21:15:07 hard line forthing 21:15:11 isforth cant as yet do so but it WILL be able to do so 21:15:14 thats the difference 21:15:17 hah 21:15:29 well I don't give a fuck about the definitions, I just want a forth that works. : | 21:15:31 you cannot write a metacompiler for gforth 21:15:34 * crc will be able to metacompile rf in the future, at least under linux 21:15:46 not unless you take the time to write a c compiler extension to forth 21:15:55 I'm trying to split my assembler words away from my cross compiler worth. 21:15:56 er words 21:15:58 well stop using gforth 21:16:03 try isforth 21:16:11 what are you trying to do that gforth wont let you do 21:16:23 gforth is just breaking when I try to use a feature I thought was supported. 21:16:30 what are you trying to do that gforth wont let you do 21:16:39 .. 21:16:46 I just showed you a test case. 21:16:53 vocabulary foo 21:16:57 vocabulary bar 21:17:00 vocabulary bam 21:17:02 .vocs 21:17:12 will show all existing vocabs and those three 21:17:12 that's not the test case. :) 21:17:19 ok 21:17:22 vocabulary foo 21:17:25 : blah .... ; 21:17:31 vocabulary bar 21:17:33 .vocs 21:17:37 will show foo and bar 21:17:41 foo and bar will be empty 21:18:06 .. but I don't want to do that. I want to create a vocab, allocate a buffer, and then create another one. 21:18:17 you can do anything you want 21:18:20 create a vocabulary 21:18:22 do anything 21:18:24 create a vocabulary 21:18:33 okay, well you can't do that in gforth. 21:18:41 because gforth is not sane 21:18:45 vocabulary foo 21:18:48 1234 allot 21:18:50 vocabulary bar 21:19:24 i wouldnt want to try debug anything as obfuscated and convoluted as a forth written in c 21:19:39 on the other hand, a forth written in forth/assembler is simple 21:19:50 yet not simplistic 21:19:58 the whole point of this is I'm trying to cross compile the forth I just wrote. 21:20:17 your avr forth 21:20:31 yah 21:20:58 well try using isforth and if you need help you have the author right here :P 21:21:06 haha 21:21:07 okay 21:21:08 thanks 21:21:18 even tho isforth is far from complete i think its much better than gforth or any other linux based forth 21:21:22 unless you go commercial 21:21:29 * crc notes that isforth has its own set of oddities... 21:21:48 oddities. but are they problematical ? 21:21:56 and can you be more specific ? :) 21:22:06 mostly not. Theres a few things that annoy me though :) 21:22:07 Like using % for mod 21:22:19 although they are in no way like GForth 21:22:21 i changed that back 21:22:21 (when the website mentions 'mod' for the operation) 21:22:25 hmm 21:22:37 tho -thats not released yet 21:22:39 because I and others were bitching about it :) 21:22:44 im going to release 1.16b soon thol 21:22:44 so it doesn't count! 21:22:50 yes it does. 21:22:55 * crc will try 1.16b when it comes out 21:23:03 Not really :) 21:23:04 i changed it specifically to see what the reaction would be 21:23:10 heh 21:23:21 I440r_: release nightly builds :) 21:23:21 i stated when i chanced it that i would change it back if enough people bitched 21:23:23 :P 21:23:27 so it DOES count 21:23:28 arke: what's a good commercial forth? 21:23:29 no 21:23:47 i need to get the ppc and fbsd versions releasable 21:23:52 actually ppc IS releasable 21:23:59 heh 21:24:25 * crc likes nightly builds; even if they are sometimes broken... it lets you keep up with the latest changes in development 21:24:34 I440r_: I like how quickly it compiles. 21:24:35 (or at least a version control repository...) 21:24:35 alexander_: I dont know. I hear SwiftForth is nice (considering ANS), but I havent used it (or any) 21:24:43 arke: okay, thanks 21:24:46 alexander_, me 2 :) 21:25:02 alexander_: I440r_ probably knows more :) 21:25:03 i would suggest iforth before swiftforth 21:25:12 iforth is marcel hendrix's forth 21:25:23 and its only $99 21:25:52 what I need is something I can depend on enough to work sanely enough that I don't have to be debugging the thing while I'm debugging my embedded board. 21:26:58 granted, beggers can't be choosers. :/ 21:27:04 :) 21:27:58 if u find anything in isforth that needs debugging thats my job :P 21:28:15 iForth seems to have not been updated in 3 years 21:28:28 but if you should happen to find a bug and its fix.... 21:28:33 that makes it stable 21:29:13 About iForth: "the Windows and Linux versions use a server written in "C" and allow dynamic linking" 21:29:22 bleh 21:29:27 heh 21:29:29 ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha 21:29:40 swiftforth doesnt 21:29:40 best stick with isForth or RetroForth :) 21:29:42 i dont believe 21:29:45 * arke hands I440r_ the gun with the Foot picture on it 21:29:52 : 21:29:53 :) 21:30:03 SwiftForth is metacompiled 21:30:08 iforth is still prefereab;le to swiftforth 21:30:23 because swiftforth has its head buried so deep in its ans ass it will never see the light of day 21:30:31 iforth is not ans compliant 21:31:09 lol 21:31:16 * crc notes that I440r_ is the most anti-ANS person in this channel 21:31:26 I440r_: my dear friend, isforth is more ans compliant than you'd like to believe :) 21:31:51 arke no. its not ans compliant at all 21:31:57 its not far off 21:31:59 * crc could probably write a nice ANS layer for isForth.... 21:32:09 but those places it diverges are important 21:32:16 probably not 21:32:16 I440r_: thats my point. Nothing much needed to make it compliant :) 21:32:29 some big changes in the kernel i think 21:32:34 I440r_: if I can do one for RetroForth, I can do one for isForth 21:32:36 and some of the extensions are contrary 21:32:43 (RetroForth is also quite non-ANS compliant) 21:32:45 please dont :P 21:32:54 I won't 21:33:08 * crc thinks that ANS limits design flexibility 21:33:26 I440r_: I do have some code to allow multiple entry points in isForth... 21:33:29 * arke agrees 21:33:34 my whole reason for not foillowing it like the rest of the sheep 21:33:41 you do ? 21:33:42 show me 21:33:48 ahaha 21:34:09 if i like it ill include it :P 21:36:02 : skip-colon-start r> 9 + >r ; 21:36:02 : : compile skip-colon-start [compile] [ reveal head" ,call nest ] ; immediate 21:36:14 : foo 1 : bar 2 + . cr ; 21:36:15 foo 21:36:17 3 21:36:19 6 bar 21:36:22 8 21:36:24 :) 21:36:47 lol 21:37:46 Sonarman helped me get that working... 21:38:07 Sonarman is the guy to ask if you want an odd hack for something :) 21:38:48 im going to change that to : :: instead of : : 21:38:51 :P 21:38:56 that's fine :) 21:39:00 and then :: foo .... ; 21:39:07 : foo 1 :: bar 2 + . cr ; 21:39:08 just so it doesnt conflict :P 21:39:14 cool 21:39:35 err, why? 21:39:40 just check to see if its compiling :) 21:42:27 because i dont consider it a suitale substitute/replacement for the existing definition for : 21:42:36 but it wouldnt be 21:42:38 but it might be something someone might like to use :P 21:42:53 it would only do the action if its already in compile ode 21:42:54 mode 21:42:58 otherwise its the same 21:43:00 :) 21:44:13 it would reveal early 21:44:16 thats not safe 21:44:24 rf always reveals early 21:44:49 because you dont know how to do vocabularies :P 21:44:51 ok, you have a point there :) 21:44:52 }:) 21:44:55 gah 21:44:57 lol 21:45:06 variable curvoc 21:45:06 : voc: create last @ , does> dup curvoc ! last @ swap dup @ last ! ; 21:45:06 : leave last @ swap ! last ! ; 21:45:12 dont need no stinking vocabularies, only loc: ;loc :) 21:45:27 simple vocabularies are easy :) 21:45:30 voc: foo 21:45:31 foo 21:45:37 : bar ... ; 21:45:38 leave 21:45:50 (bar is only visible within the foo vocabulary) 21:47:07 hi all 21:47:10 hi saon 21:47:21 also your definition breaks see 21:47:38 No... 21:47:41 yes 21:47:52