00:00:00 --- log: started forth/05.06.25 00:26:55 --- quit: Herkamire ("off to bed") 05:13:21 --- join: PoppaVic (~pete@0-1pool73-251.nas24.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 05:13:59 Mornin' 05:16:01 Hi. 05:59:06 ahh... Now I see what you meant, Stepan 06:09:04 hmpfh-hmpfh 06:09:13 .. May be a cleaner solution... 06:17:25 Intriguing... Bastich.. it means a major rewrite 06:22:15 --- quit: PoppaVic ("Pulls the pin...") 06:39:53 --- join: PoppaVic (~pete@0-1pool65-51.nas22.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 07:02:27 --- join: Topaz (~top@spc1-horn1-6-0-cust117.cosh.broadband.ntl.com) joined #forth 07:02:33 lo 07:02:43 afternoon ;) 07:18:51 --- nick: saon_ -> saon 07:19:51 lo 07:23:13 --- quit: dt0x ("ERC Version 5.0 $Revision: 1.743 $ (IRC client for Emacs)") 07:24:28 --- join: d3ly51um (~user@66.189.37.253) joined #forth 07:24:35 --- part: d3ly51um left #forth 07:28:25 I'm beginning to believe 'token-code' is the best generic solution. 07:28:52 For some particular platform, or in general? 07:29:53 generically.. it's a level more complex and slower, but vastly more portable,and Metacompiling is still a possibility. 07:30:12 More portable? How so? 08:04:36 --- join: Herkamire (~jason@c-24-218-95-147.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) joined #forth 08:04:36 --- mode: ChanServ set +o Herkamire 08:05:02 lo, Herkamire 08:08:53 hi 08:09:43 been beating code for days, and I think I've reached a new cusp. 08:10:52 Given that most folks have fast cpu, and I am seeking portability: I think I need to interp/compile ids/xts rather than pointers 08:14:03 Herkamire: given much thought to Metacompiling? or true "compiling"? 08:16:37 what do you mean by metacompiling 08:16:39 ? 08:17:29 if, like most people in here, you mean a system that compiles it's self, then yes, I think it's very valuable, and my forth (herkforth) does it. 08:17:42 Well, for Forth - it means generating a crosscompiled Forth. Further, it can mean regenerating all the code needed to build a new and smaller, restricted binary 08:18:04 Herkamire: do you call-thread or xt-thread? 08:18:30 I compile branch instructions directly. I think that's called subroutine threaded 08:18:52 hmm, maybe - yeah 08:18:55 what do you mean by "crosscompiled"? 08:19:15 getting code from Forth to some target-platform. 08:19:32 the old forth-assembler is an example 08:19:46 ..it didn't necessarily compile for the CURRENT platform 08:20:49 hmph.. Anyway, given one layer of abstraction and slow-down, I think I can cogitate a "portable" system. 08:20:54 ok, so by crosscompile, you don't nessesarily mean across hardware architectures... 08:21:11 it prolly would, but it doesn't have to 08:21:25 Could be a similar cpu, but different kernel/os 08:21:54 all "cross compile" means is, A generates B-type-code and can save it 08:22:24 for some reason, listening to really loud music yet still being able to communicate properly on IRC feels very weird 08:22:34 B might end up getting inner & outer interp - that RUN on B - and code that runs on A _and_ B 08:22:41 do you hold as a rule that A does not run on B-type code? 08:23:10 right, A might be big-endian, and B might be little-endian - not to mention the ABI's 08:23:40 I see 08:23:41 It's a mess, but I keep flogging it... I just _KNOW_ forth offers a solution. 08:24:26 well, some of the threading models don't care how the core is implemented terribly 08:24:28 basically, past text/source, we need a PORTABLE form and - no more than - MAYBE a local-form 08:24:37 right 08:24:43 Understood 08:24:45 then you just need a compatible core for each architecture/host-OS 08:24:53 yeppers ;-) 08:25:19 herkforth will run under linux, open firmware and osx 08:25:20 So, I am trying to beat a C-core/module and use forms that can be portable. 08:25:36 but requires the same hardware architecture 08:26:05 Oddly enough, my goal is an extensible system to build C, but I think Forth has got the nitch to get there. 08:26:28 with C you can easily make a forth that is portable accross platforms, but then you can't metacompile 08:26:38 and it's very difficult I think to turnkey 08:26:55 ..and if you can beat the platform/abi to build portable C, then a portable forth-like system comes along for the ride ;-) 08:27:15 yeah, turnkey is gonna be an issue.. But not much of one 08:27:26 well, the advantage of C is that every platform big enough has a C compiler 08:27:32 yep 08:27:34 but the disadvantage is that C must be compiled ahead of time 08:28:09 no interactive testing/editing 08:28:16 Whereas we used to see Forth hit a platform after asm, we now have C getting there first (gcc and such), and the portability is still a whore 08:28:35 well, yeah 08:28:37 autoshit and such is just a mess 08:28:39 C is a portable assembler 08:28:45 no 08:29:07 look it up dude 08:29:13 C was designed to be a portable assembler 08:29:18 I'm not paraphrasing 08:29:25 C SHOULD be considered "portable assembler" - but the advocates will not admit it, and the autoshit stuff is their gateway to "portable". 08:29:38 trust me, I live in ##C 08:29:54 why is it ##C anyways? 08:30:00 so, yeah... THis multifaceted issue bugs me 08:30:16 saon: freenode decided that anything "nonoffical" needs ## 08:30:18 well, the advocates sound like egotists 08:30:23 no joke' 08:31:01 imagine how *I* feel, loving C, and liking forth - and astraddle the channels with fanatics 08:31:23 hehe 08:31:26 hell, I been coding LONGER than some been outta' diapers 08:34:10 the whole K&R/ansi/posix/iso thing compares to ANS/fig/herkforth/isforth/gforth 08:35:16 and, oddly enough, GNU 'as' has made me think we are all missing a bet and being stupid. 08:35:49 why does gas make you feel that way? 08:36:04 well, I did a little research the other day 08:36:28 On the WHOLE, the .directives are mostly portable, but the opcodes are certainly not. 08:37:37 so, I can envision a forth-ish system at 'as' level, generating a .directive and hexcode textfile to feed a "enduse compiler" 08:38:28 I grant you, (and feel very old), I havee not tried to read the 'as' source: so I dunno wtf it takes to generate a .o 08:38:57 but, the .directives are almost universal, and the opcodes are NOT 08:39:07 this strikes me as vocabularies 08:39:17 --- quit: Topaz (Remote closed the connection) 08:39:35 C has no comparable keyword/system 08:40:11 hence, my project to add forthlike vocs/lexicons/defs between lexer and parser 08:43:27 Frankly, I begin to believe - as I did 20 years ago - that *A* 'forth' is better for "portable assembler" than C... That 'C' should ride atop that portability. 08:44:35 or we can vice-versa - My current code is trying to never use a return-stack, but I can't much see a way to live w/o a datastack 08:46:14 Basically, I'm using 'C' to "metacompile" (bootstrap) my "portable module" 08:46:46 ok 08:47:00 With folks like I440r around, this seems pretty silly... But they will never accept the idea or bootstrapping. 08:47:04 you want to build a portable assembler in forth 08:47:11 far more than that' 08:47:52 I've not even done anything for asm. I am targettting a module akin to forth, to build a mini-shell to be used 100% by a Metabuilder 08:48:31 languages upon languages... 08:49:10 mmm 08:49:19 sounds like trouble 08:50:41 not really 08:50:58 Think of xlators, filters and transmogrifiers 08:51:45 we local assembler we can assume is GAS - that's our worst case; gcc/someone above that 08:52:00 we local/our local 08:52:48 For interp/immed: we use a forthlike system; but we need to eventually generate a file we can feed down 08:53:29 Our prob as forthers is - we expect this to ALL happen in RAM and stay the same forever 08:54:12 eh? 08:54:16 because of the way C is defined, we rarely make assumptions at compile-time, but we EXPECT shit to work once compiled 08:54:20 what stay the same forever? 08:54:39 Herkamire: here, pad, comma, etc 08:55:17 I'm trying to free myself - us? - from those expectations and live within the malloc/free universe 08:57:26 this is complicated by ansi/posix/iso/gcc, not to mention asm/as 08:57:50 huh? 08:58:16 * PoppaVic sighs 08:58:23 How to explain...? 08:58:28 how can you run without assuming that your core code utils are in memory? 08:58:37 the PLATFORM and kernel are the initial issue 08:58:52 Herkamire: virtual-memory 08:59:15 you can use addresses, but they exist in the NOW 08:59:27 ..unless they are in the objects 09:00:22 think 'linker and loader' 09:00:44 a major prob for folks is getting past ancient .com files 09:02:09 what's your idea? 09:02:24 not sure, it keeps flowing, evolving and mutating 09:02:45 I KNOW we need a bottom-line "assembler" - sans opcodes 09:03:02 we need 'macro-assemblers' above that 09:03:50 how does/should the presense of virtual-memory effect a programmer's expectations? 09:03:55 and, I think that my use of C under forthish is temporary. We need something to create this stuff 09:04:12 I have problems to catch your idea, you wan't a portable assembler, right? 09:04:15 Herkamire: memory-limits, swapping, cirtual-addresses 09:04:25 virtual 09:04:55 virl: hehe, I began this with a goal in mind, and it is growing and mutating as folks declaim it. 09:05:04 ok, I'm having trouble making sense of anything you're saying now 09:05:36 it would be easier when you could tell us your goal :) 09:05:50 Herkamire: I have N-meg or real ram... The system can treat that as 256*n-meg 09:06:10 what do we care? all we care is shit is available and exists and we can ref it 09:06:21 C does this quite well 09:06:57 right. so forth and C both assume things are in memory 09:07:04 and virtual-memory doesn't change that 09:07:18 'memory' being something the kernel KNOWS and we can ignore 09:07:25 right 09:08:00 now, the prob with most forth is: they want to bypass all this noise and pretend they ARE the OS 09:08:17 and quite a few aren't pretending :) 09:08:31 Great for speed and simplemindedness - not so good for space 09:08:48 Also doesn't help "portability" 09:08:50 what's not so good for space? 09:09:10 bypassing the goddamned OS virtual-mem system 09:09:12 forths are famous for getting a lot done in little space 09:09:19 arrrghhhhh 09:09:29 I know that, knew that decades ago 09:09:33 I didn't think it was possible to bypass the virtual-mem system 09:09:42 they still are 09:09:46 mostly because fig-forth did a shitload of threading 09:10:07 Chuck designed an awesome computer chip on his operating system and cad software that were both on a FLOPPY 09:10:16 ok, maybe I need to chill and let stuff percolate 09:11:08 PoppaVic, what are you ultimately trying to accomplish? i have yet to understand your original intentions 09:11:18 I don't really know much of anything about fig-forth, except that I think it is generally better liked than ans by people who seem to me to know what they're talking about 09:12:16 saon: originally, I wanted a mere module between lexer and parser ala' Forth. Then I started looking at what the lexer and parser were doing and started thinking about gcc and gas - and then linkers & loaders 09:12:57 well, trust me: fig-forth was USUALLY the next lang after asm that ever hit a chip - that was decades ago 09:13:40 folks got bent over fig and went f79, f83, and f-pc 09:13:43 ahh, sorry, I've only been programming for 10-11 years 09:14:05 ..and their solutions merely closed down holes or added new ideas 09:14:53 one of the greatest ideas in f83/fpc was not their insane branching args, but instead: the idea of a vocstack 09:15:59 that wasnt a tom zimmer idea and its called the context stack 09:17:41 ns: doesn't matter who or the "proper nomenclature" - it was pivotal 09:18:41 I've got issues of "Forth Dimensions" older than most folks here ;-) But, the prob was - we had a ton of ideas, and no "body" - we merely had the ANS commies 09:19:10 It'd be funny if it was not so dad 09:19:12 sad 09:20:14 Anyway, damn.. we got coders galore, but they either trail off in a closed path or they suck up to the ans-commies. It becomes pretty depressing. 09:21:02 whatia mean closed path? 09:22:22 The only kicker I see is: 1) forthists see vocs/wordlists/words; 2) they expect the lexer to be dead-simpleminded; 3) they nearly invariably generate [ip]code PERIOD.. 09:23:06 what's [ip]code? 09:23:22 Herkamire: "closed" as in "There is no OS, no libc, no .object, no .lib, no .s)hared-o)bject. 09:23:35 intermediate or pcode 09:24:08 so "closed path" means working directly with the hardware/os and not mucking about with libraries? 09:24:18 forth was ORIGINALLY a language dedicated to shit w/o an os 09:24:32 right. "Do the job, fuck the world" 09:24:38 yes, and many feel that it is still best that way 09:25:00 I don't think they're hostile 09:25:00 cool, they can learn crosscompiling, too 09:25:15 no, hostility has no value 09:25:54 BLINDNESS and unwillingness to discuss interlacing the language with the existing OS, yeah: that can become an issue 09:26:06 I think there is however quite a bit of the feeling that the world of computing is headed very much in the wrong direction, and is not solvable by working within the current systems 09:26:43 I will, w/o equivocation, state here and now: that a system w/o an OS needs to get a forth installed IMMEDIATELY 09:27:10 I am not terribly interested in helping to solve the problems with linux/windoze/mac because that is beyond what I'm capable of (by myself) and I don't think it's headed in the right direction weth everybody working on it 09:27:12 Herkamire: you cannot change the world - I've tried for decades. 09:27:39 Herkamire: well, then even #openbios and Stepan are not enough 09:27:41 thanks for the encouragement >;-) 09:28:12 I can make a kickass OS by myself, preferebly with a little help 09:28:45 Not one - in over 20 years - programmer has ever tried to code the parallel to a linux/*bsd kernel in forth. And, I suspect I'll be dust before I ever see it. 09:28:50 it's perfectly possible to change the world 09:28:58 sure 09:29:08 * Robert would like to wait for some decent hardware. 09:29:09 I don't want to code a paralell to linux 09:29:14 fine 09:29:20 Good luck to you 09:29:22 that would be pointless 09:29:33 REALLY? Interesting 09:29:47 I'm focusing on usability 09:29:51 Not stuff that drowns below decades of legacy and automagic, unpredictable caching. 09:29:52 on interface design 09:30:01 right 09:30:04 so, *nix is "not good enough", but its not worth encapsulating or even replacing. 09:30:14 interesting 09:30:27 I use linux, because it's the best thing I've found that will run on my current computer 09:30:39 ahh 09:30:43 I'm writing a replacement, because I think it would be easier than getting what I want on top of linux 09:30:45 again "interesting" 09:30:49 in the looong run 09:31:01 plus I just like doing stuff myself 09:31:03 yeah, personal-peeves over decades 09:31:26 OK, so much for that 09:31:26 I prefer learning about hardware and how to work directly with it, to learning about APIs and such 09:31:34 forthers like to reinvent the wheel. 09:31:41 yep 09:32:21 This rather justifies my IBM buddy that states: "Forth: the worlds most unsupported language" 09:32:29 when people ask "why should I use your software?" I'll have good answers, not just techno details that only forthers will appreciate 09:32:41 "it's free, fun, and you got so much more work done" 09:32:50 Herkamire: trust me, you will die alone and unknown. 09:33:01 FUN I can understand 09:33:21 I don't have to put MS out of the OS market or anything 09:33:33 dude, yer digging a hole 09:33:47 look, you're not going to convince me to stop 09:34:11 There is a reason that the ANS commies and advocates all work for someone with a special variant that they charge big$$$ for. 09:34:28 I would NEVER try to dissuade a forther 09:34:48 --- join: saon_ (~saon@c-24-129-91-106.hsd1.fl.comcast.net) joined #forth 09:34:51 ..no more than I would tell a C user to learn perl 09:35:42 BUT, I do do the latter for viciousness, and I will certainly encourage you to spin yer 4-wheel-drive in the mud all you like. 09:35:53 one good thing about an encapsulated forth system, with its own assembler & co. is that it's possible to install a development chain in a system without one, like windows. 09:36:16 virl: that was true with FIG over 20 years ago 09:36:29 ..the world is larger and more complicated 09:37:00 PoppaVic: how can you say "I would NEVER try to dissuade a forther" right after saying "dude, yer digging a hole" and "Herkamire: trust me, you will die alone and unknown." 09:37:10 for embedded systems, sure: use forth, 09:37:52 Herkamire: it wouldn't dissuade you, and I wont either. Perhaps my great-nephew will eventually use your system 09:37:58 you can't argue that it's impossible to write a system that becomes popular 09:38:02 linux is a good example 09:38:10 not really 09:38:11 --- quit: saon (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 09:38:13 why shouldn't work it now? fascinating stuff like individual optimisation would be possible. 09:38:23 as I understand it, Linus just say the need, and started writing it 09:38:34 or did he just write it at first to see if he could? 09:38:45 given linux, and freebsd - and doze - you want to displace them. Go for it. 09:39:42 no, linus took shit like minix and made it WORK - the current mess makes me want to puke. MEANWHILE, you are talking about a parallel - not a layer. 09:39:47 oh, hell a hybrid forth system would be amazing 09:39:53 yep 09:40:07 ok, so it's a bit different 09:40:15 waaaayyyyyy diff 09:40:18 but I've done a lot of thinking about the schedule, and it'll work fine 09:40:26 No good 09:40:34 I started about two years ago, with no experience with asm or drivers or anything whatsoever 09:40:51 Either you replace A with B or you patch B over A or you write A' 09:41:04 and now I've got a bootable, metacompiling OS with the best IDE I've ever used 09:41:10 great 09:41:45 how many folks have adopted it? Who controls the releases? Can I get it for my Foo-Manchu-800? 09:42:05 no, because its assembler. 09:42:09 ahhhh 09:42:15 WHO asm? 09:42:32 brb 09:42:34 intel asm? gnu asm? 09:42:40 powerpc? 09:42:48 hehe: see my point? 09:43:39 If you want to see "why I love forth interp/compile": see GCC source 09:43:40 that was something I everytime hate, today it's difficult to write assembler. 09:43:47 yep 09:44:10 I've been arguing that here and in ##C for years now 09:44:29 your point? 09:44:36 that it's not popular yet? 09:44:46 or running on mainstream hardware? 09:45:26 My point is: the bottom line so far sucks, the libs are marginal - and Forth heads off into ozone as badly as C folks 09:45:30 eh? sry, but my english isn't the best. 09:46:12 to get anything, you need an assembler; C was SUPPOSED to be "portable assembler" - and forth has sucked hind-tit for decades 09:46:30 hind-tit? 09:46:32 I don't like the issues, but I see them 09:46:51 virl: unwanted stepchild 09:47:46 so, we assume - lately - a platform/os. We MIGHT assume an assembler. 09:48:05 we MUST assume C is gonna' show asap. 09:48:22 and, forth can do better given one or the other 09:48:22 but we can't 09:48:27 sure we can 09:48:52 virl: cross-compiling a binary-image 09:49:07 oh, wait: that would mean C usually 09:49:13 my bad 09:49:29 Recycle - revamp - re-argue 09:50:23 Check it out for a few days... It makes for depressing articles and ciews 09:50:25 views 09:51:19 there is a HUGE reason for .o/.a adoption universally 09:51:32 ..not to mention a.out 09:51:58 sarcasm? 09:53:25 so what do you thing is THE SOLUTION to fix that broken bottom line of the development chain? 09:54:26 Honestly? Not sure.. A forthish masm over an asm? a Forthish C/whatever? 09:54:47 basically, forth cannot use a special mem-only fmt forever 09:55:46 damn, gf just found a tick on me 09:56:17 what's this bit mean? "we MUST assume C is gonna' show asap." 09:58:14 I've gotten this far from scratch in 2 years 09:58:46 I expect in another 2 years I'll be running it more than linux 09:58:46 is there a forth/C interface? 09:58:57 chatting on IRC, checking my mail, and looking up stuff on the net with it 10:00:44 no, there is no universal C/forth interface. But, nowadays gcc will get there before forth 10:00:56 ..mostly because forth has stagnated 10:01:06 ah, really? so in 2 years you'll show us running the game 'uplink' on you OS, ok? 10:01:21 why in the world would I play a game? 10:01:50 @Herkamire 10:02:18 look, if you want to believe forth is std and ported and even replacing the OS is good, fine. I have no time for such. 10:02:24 virl: ahhh 10:02:54 what? 10:03:09 not following the bit about believing forth is std and ported 10:03:15 because today this is a big argument for an OS 10:03:16 ok, I'm gonna' toddle off and have lunch, and a nap - quick before I gotta' help move furniture. 10:03:22 laters 10:03:24 --- quit: PoppaVic ("Pulls the pin...") 10:04:47 virl: yeah, I expect in about 2 years it will be quite productive and friendly for doing a few common tasks, like googling, irc and maybe e-mail 10:05:17 and probably X will run on it... 10:05:31 nah 10:05:50 a posix environment, if it ever exists will be quite a bit further in the future 10:06:39 ok, then it will be something like opendos, but with lesser features. 10:06:55 actually, instead of a posix environment, I might just make a virtualizer or whatever it's called, basically like an emulator, except for the same processor architecture 10:06:58 like MOL 10:07:59 it'll be something like rchi frontend with colorforth backend 10:10:25 virl: do you run linux? 10:10:44 with the help of qemu, herkforth runs quite well on just about any architecture with linux 10:26:41 man, I never got to ask PoppaVic what he thought the "HUGE reason for .o/.a adoption universally" was 10:27:13 I always figured it was because C/C++ took so damn long to compile 10:30:26 Herkamire: I've started writing all the apps I use on a daily basis, in forth.. so when the time comes, I can plop them all on my custom apps ontop of my own Forth OS 10:31:02 alexander_: that sounds very farmilliar... do you have other nics? 10:31:44 that's really cool btw :) 10:33:05 As I expected, I didn't make SoC. 10:33:24 Herkamire: no, I don't. 10:33:37 I started writing an IRC client,.. which is almost done 10:33:47 it let me put together a set of words to deal with line-based protocols 10:33:55 so maybe I can do SMTP and IMAP next 10:34:00 Do you think it's reasonable with a database of Forth words on the word level (as opposed to the standard file or program level), so that each word can be compiled, downloaded etc. individually? 10:34:10 alexander_: very cool 10:34:20 Herkamire: I've also got a SHA-1 implementation that I wrote, that's going to let me start writing an SSH client. 10:34:42 Robert: yes, I'm in the process of changing herkforth to store it's source that way 10:34:47 time for breakfast, bbl 10:35:16 Actually I thought about a larger scale, as in an internet achive. 10:35:18 archive 10:35:51 yeah, I'll get to that :) 10:35:55 it will be herkforth specific though 10:37:59 I haven't worked out the details yet 10:38:18 Sounds nice. 10:38:26 but I'll work out some version controll system that is some kind of database of definitions 10:39:10 that stuff is a ways off though 10:39:25 currently herkforth has no concept of source outside it's self 10:39:52 but that will have to change 10:40:57 one thing at a time though 10:41:12 Would be a cool way to be able to modify single functions in a system without having to resort to slow indirect threaded models. 10:41:20 first I need to finish my new editor for the new source format 10:41:20 Yes, I suppose so :) 10:41:37 Herkforth... I forget - is that a colored forth for ppc? 10:41:45 yes 10:42:04 Ah, cool. Except I'm an x86 creature. 10:42:16 if you have linux, you can run it with the help of qemu 10:42:24 runs quite well that way in fact 10:44:20 Herkamire, I'm a linux user which is currently running a windows, because I'm writing my game forth for the XGS, it's name is 'thunderforth'. 10:44:39 virl: :) 10:44:54 XGS? 10:45:15 XGS: www.xgamestation.com 10:45:23 ok, I'm going to go finish tab-completion 10:46:03 Hmm... 10:46:21 That Fabrice Bellard guy seems to be somewhat of a genius. 10:47:25 who? 10:47:43 http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/ 10:48:10 Maker of Qemu, tcc, and a mathematician too... 10:57:46 qemu is wonderful 10:57:56 I'm very impressed 10:58:23 emulates ppc on ppc about 20X faster than pearpc iirc 10:58:32 I forget exactly 10:58:34 but way faster 10:59:03 and I _do_ remember that it emulates ppc on ppc only 20x slower than native 10:59:08 which is plenty fast for herkforth 10:59:13 xgs looks really cool 10:59:24 except I'm not sure I want to code for an 8 bit cpu 11:02:58 I'm still a bit confused about it= 11:03:14 what's this mean: 4Kx12 WORD onboard FLASH memory 11:03:31 means 4000 12bit words? 11:04:06 do your games have to fit in the flash mem? 11:17:55 native games, yeah. but it has an 128k sram too :-) so I take forth for it. 11:19:07 and yes, it means 4000 x 12bit memory, iirc. 11:20:05 ahh, sram would help 11:20:11 is that included in the $200? 11:21:01 yep. 11:21:11 cool 11:22:54 sram zeros out when you kill the power right? 11:23:57 after my forth-system for this thing, I think I'm ready to learn the x86 instruction set. everytime I tried to learn it, I get quickly frustrated about the lot of instructions, the missing support for assembler on a lot of OSes 11:24:12 zeros out? 11:25:20 do you mean it resets the sram to zero when it gets no power? I don't know. 11:25:31 --- quit: saon_ ("Lost terminal") 11:26:31 I have a hard time imagining fitting any useful pice of software into 4K 11:27:50 Hah. 11:28:25 I'm just too young 11:28:39 The book I had on computers mentions 4k words as the optimum size of the main memory in a computer, but that much is "not yet practical". 11:28:42 I know compiled ppc code is big 11:28:58 after seeing menuetos, I had no more problems of thinking that every useful thing could fit into it. 11:29:00 However, core memory (which the author suggested at a lecture last year) may make it possible. 11:29:26 Hehe, has MenuetOS evolved? 11:30:13 Hm, seems a lot like when I last looked. 11:30:43 Nice idea I admit, but not a very good implementation... Although I really like the flat assembler. 11:31:03 I tried menuetos. pretty cool they get all that on a floppy 11:31:17 didn't like the GUI, but asside from that, it was neat 11:32:15 but still, 4k is 300X+ smaller than a floppy 11:32:51 and it's something which no forth system ever achieved 11:33:04 virl: what's that? 11:33:23 what is what? 11:34:19 --- join: saon (~saon@c-24-129-91-106.hsd1.fl.comcast.net) joined #forth 11:34:33 I only say that I haven't see any forth system which I could compare to menuetos 11:35:15 Won't you only have to fit some loader software anyway? 11:35:16 what specifically were you saying that forth systems have not achieved? 11:35:23 The RAM is large... 11:36:19