00:00:00 --- log: started forth/05.09.11
00:55:00 --- join: gihgi (n=gihgi@bzq-82-81-31-48.red.bezeqint.net) joined #forth
01:02:31 --- quit: gihgi ("BitchX-1.0c19 -- just do it.")
01:03:13 --- join: gihgi (n=gihgi@bzq-82-81-31-48.red.bezeqint.net) joined #forth
01:49:00 --- quit: gihgi ("gihgi has no reason")
07:07:09 --- join: PoppaVic (n=pete@0-1pool46-215.nas30.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth
07:07:48 <PoppaVic> G'day
07:22:06 --- join: JasonWoof (n=jason@pdpc/supporter/student/Herkamire) joined #forth
07:22:06 --- mode: ChanServ set +o JasonWoof
07:23:32 <PoppaVic> Mornin'
09:48:20 --- log: started forth/05.09.11
09:48:20 --- join: clog (i=nef@bespin.org) joined #forth
09:48:20 --- topic: 'Forth: One language, many dialects.  #forth - general forth discussion.  #c4th - ColorForth.   #retro - RetroForth. #c4th-ot - social channel.  #1xforth - a secret channel for 1xforthers.  #concatenative - the category of language that forth belongs to (sorta).'
09:48:20 --- topic: set by crc on [Sat Jul 23 13:29:38 2005]
09:48:20 --- names: list (clog sproingie @crc @thinfu @JasonWoof PoppaVic Snoopy42 saon_ derv0 onetom madgarden ccfg Quartus virl docl warpzero OrngeTide Raystm2 saon slava skylan ianp)
10:06:36 --- quit: PoppaVic ("brb")
10:08:12 --- join: PoppaVic (n=pete@0-1pool47-156.nas30.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth
10:14:07 --- join: crc2 (i=crc@pool-70-110-153-56.phil.east.verizon.net) joined #forth
10:14:29 --- quit: crc (Nick collision from services.)
10:14:31 --- nick: crc2 -> crc
10:14:33 --- mode: ChanServ set +o crc
10:15:20 <PoppaVic> slow, slow day
10:15:39 <crc> yup
10:16:18 <thinfu> PoppaVic: well nobody wants to talk to you
10:16:30 <PoppaVic> ahh, that must be it
10:18:20 <thinfu> p.s. sighing makes you seem pompous (which you are anyways)
10:18:38 <thinfu> bleh i'm in full asshole mode right now
10:19:17 <PoppaVic> yes, pompous.
10:19:58 <thinfu> 1xforth coding is asshole coding isn't it?  getting straight to the point, ignoring all social conventions
10:20:14 <PoppaVic> lx or one-x?
10:20:33 <PoppaVic> no idea. There are too many forth-systems to try to track.
10:21:27 <thinfu> http://www.ultratechnology.com/1xforth.htm
10:21:29 <thinfu> its a philosophy
10:22:36 <docl> 1xtalking
10:22:40 <docl> =
10:22:43 <thinfu> :D
10:23:03 <docl> 1xthinking :)
10:23:10 <PoppaVic> philosophy is a waste of time <shrug> It's like talking good/evil, right/wrong.
10:23:39 <thinfu> then maybe you should read "Philosophy: Who needs it?"
10:23:41 <thinfu> http://thin.bespin.org/files/philosophy/whoneedsit.html
10:23:43 <PoppaVic> My exposure to the "philosophies of programming" are very old.
10:23:46 <virl> systems without a philosophy are souleless.
10:25:12 <thinfu> 1xforth is a programming philosophy/methodology..  you avoid introducing layers and complexity because adding 10x extra code increases the complexity by 100x which increases the bugs, the workaround code, etc
10:25:48 <docl> philosophy can be useful, or misleading.
10:25:49 <thinfu> plus when you code ontop of all that..
10:25:59 <PoppaVic> yes, yes.. And you can talk of classes, and inheritance and such all days as well.
10:26:32 <thinfu> docl: misleading how?
10:27:13 <thinfu> PoppaVic: you are a man who wishes to avoid thinking for fear of doing the right thing
10:27:23 <docl> by grabbing your focus and letting you think you're 100% right, you can miss a lot of relevant materials
10:27:26 <PoppaVic> ahh, that must be it
10:29:19 <docl> a skilled manipulator can find a philosophical grey area, paint it either black or white, and use that for mind control
10:30:02 <PoppaVic> there is never a true black & white. Grey is pretty much the universe.
10:30:07 <docl> people are scared of grey areas, so if their leader is wrong, they believe the opposite would have to be true.
10:30:18 <docl> actually there are black and white areas as well :P
10:30:30 <PoppaVic> otoh, there is "gee, that's nice" versus "damn, that's ugly"
10:31:02 <PoppaVic> nope. it's all grey. Code is like books & authors: everyone has preferences.
10:31:12 <docl> the thing is b&w are contextually defined
10:31:20 <PoppaVic> ..or even "pretensions" to hide their true prefs
10:31:41 <PoppaVic> context is a major, major motivator
10:31:47 <docl> but don't mistake contextually defined for non-existent
10:31:58 <PoppaVic> yup
10:33:03 <PoppaVic> Personally, I like *nix-ish systems for free & portable basics. And, I('d) like(wish-for) "portable code" between users - before it hits unique hardware.
10:33:40 <PoppaVic> It's all sorta' related, but I fully understand kids that can't back off the scope-settings.
10:34:32 <thinfu> well as long as the users aren't fucked over by bloated and crash-prone software
10:34:39 <PoppaVic> To some folks, "Field of View" is THE endall; to others, its "precision & clarity" of image.
10:36:11 <PoppaVic> bloated is no more impressive than "crash-prone".
10:38:02 <thinfu> if it runs slow, has a poor usability interface because of "bells & whistles", and a tendency to crash, or to do things its not supposed to do, or to modify the OS willy nilly..  
10:38:04 <PoppaVic> I already know Doze is broken-crap, and DOS was it's errand-boy. <shrug> Neither C nor forth should really be within those broken-parameters, just call upon it.
10:38:29 <PoppaVic> your declamations lack any real thought.
10:38:49 <docl> 1xthought
10:39:08 <thinfu> PoppaVic: support that statement
10:39:11 <PoppaVic> "bells&whistles" mean whole universes of different issues between kernels/OS and languages
10:39:35 <thinfu> well in that context i was refering strictly to the interface
10:39:47 <PoppaVic> I see a *LOT* of folks just totally torqued because not all embrace linux
10:39:53 <PoppaVic> ..ame with doze
10:39:58 <PoppaVic> same, two
10:40:09 <thinfu> linux and windows both suck 
10:40:21 <docl> whole universes is the trouble
10:40:22 <PoppaVic> neither is true; while both are
10:41:03 <PoppaVic> "as an OS, doze is a great graphics engine"
10:41:18 <PoppaVic> languages? no. OS? no.
10:41:30 <docl> each necessary os component gets re-created instead of updated
10:41:31 <thinfu> PoppaVic: is english your first language?
10:41:59 <PoppaVic> thinfu: only. I gave up on German in HS
10:42:28 <docl> this isn't english, this is chat-ese
10:43:25 <PoppaVic> well, it's sorta' an overview-discussion.
10:43:39 <PoppaVic> ..you can't often do it in other than forth-ish universes
10:44:05 <docl> why should a browser be anything more than a trivial task?  doesn't an OS have all the necessary components?
10:44:24 <PoppaVic> well, there is OS, sockets/files and graphics
10:44:38 <PoppaVic> ..and, again - tons of baggage
10:45:15 <docl> sockets/files, graphics, etc. are the essential libs of the os
10:45:26 <PoppaVic> I think *nixism is the key, but the libs above everything are just funky
10:45:33 <PoppaVic> no
10:45:42 <PoppaVic> an os means a LOT of things.
10:45:55 <docl> filesystem, kernel
10:46:08 <PoppaVic> you need to return to the old "what is a "BIOS?" thing and climb up and out
10:46:12 <docl> modules for any special hardware
10:46:15 <thinfu> i think the ultimate goal of coding is to increase user productivity..  however, some of the tools and languages that programmers choose to make things easier for themselves contradict the productivity of users...  especially of the users do not wish to upgrade their computers beyond their already ridiculously blazing fast computers..  its not that the computers are slow, its the software that is bloated
10:46:44 <PoppaVic> hmm. verbose, but perhaps close
10:48:02 <PoppaVic> most folks mean "General Purpose Computer", when they say 'computer' - but it just doesn't work well - the way folks bandy terms anymore
10:48:09 <thinfu> have you guys noticed that most computer deals, like dell comps or whatever, are most commonly coming out with only 40 gig hdds?   even though we're up to 250 gigs for the best bang for the buck.   this is a sign that the average user doesn't need more than 40 gigs
10:48:23 <thinfu> and i think we'll see the same thing with the rest of the computer components
10:48:43 <thinfu> at some point the average user won't need something faster, with more ram, etc
10:48:57 <PoppaVic> 40 gig, even being a programmer, is decent for me - yeah
10:49:07 <thinfu> yeah
10:49:10 <docl> I guess then the devel revenues will go down
10:49:15 <thinfu> i have 200gigs myself but thats cuz i download anime/movies
10:49:23 <virl> yeah, but users which download much things from the inet need 100g++
10:49:27 <thinfu> yeah i imagine the growth in hdds will slow down
10:49:45 <PoppaVic> see.. now yer all debating specialties and hw
10:50:00 <thinfu> eh, i changed the topic
10:50:01 <PoppaVic> ..might as well debate ipods
10:50:21 <docl> anyhow, good hw is not an excuse for bad sw
10:50:32 <thinfu> right
10:50:33 <PoppaVic> or vice-versa
10:50:47 <thinfu> bad hw is not an excuse for good sw? heh
10:50:59 <thinfu> good sw needs no excuses :P
10:51:07 <PoppaVic> why work hard to do well if you CAN'T?
10:51:25 <PoppaVic> ..worse, the portability suffers
10:52:20 <PoppaVic> I often saw the #asm guys argue in FAVOR of nonportable, fast "crap" - the defenses often sounds like a few #forth or ##c issues
10:52:48 <docl> why should faster be nonportable?  doesn't make much sense to me
10:52:57 <PoppaVic> I just think folks lose sight of the porpoises
10:53:06 <PoppaVic> docl: I agree
10:53:09 <docl> dolphins, even
10:53:16 <thinfu> nonportable portability is not that hard..
10:53:16 <PoppaVic> and define "faster" or "smaller"
10:53:50 <thinfu> anyways simplicity is most important
10:54:18 <thinfu> i see some guys aiming for smaller which really amounts to making it more simple
10:54:33 <docl> simplicity for educational purposes?  or other purposes?
10:54:34 <thinfu> well not in the asm world :P
10:54:53 <thinfu> simplicity applies to everything
10:55:01 <thinfu> makes it easier for the users
10:55:03 <thinfu> for the programmers
10:55:07 <PoppaVic> not really
10:55:10 <docl> I guess easy to maintain mandates easy to learn
10:55:20 <PoppaVic> smaller is never really "more simple"
10:55:24 <thinfu> ultimately there's no line between user and programmer
10:55:27 <thinfu> all users are programmers
10:55:31 <thinfu> all programmers are users
10:55:35 <docl> uhm
10:55:35 <PoppaVic> you have to trade-off size/speed
10:55:36 <thinfu> make it simple
10:55:43 <PoppaVic> no
10:55:57 <PoppaVic> not every programmer is a user, nor is every user a "programmer"
10:56:06 <docl> programmers are specialized tradesmen who can and do create complex stuff
10:56:28 <thinfu> every user is essentailly a basic programmer
10:56:29 <docl> because complexity is necessary to do the job, ultimately
10:56:39 <PoppaVic> even "tradesman" is sorta' limp
10:56:47 <thinfu> complexity makes it harder to do the job
10:56:50 <PoppaVic> sorry, thin: yer wrong
10:57:08 <docl> the trick is to herd the complexity so we have to deal with it less often, or never.
10:57:19 <thinfu> look, when a user creates a batch file he's "programmed" something
10:57:31 <docl> what's complex for a user is simple for a skilled programmer
10:57:37 <thinfu> there are degrees of programming
10:57:44 <thinfu> and a user is a basic programmer
10:57:45 <docl> it's a question of focus and attention span
10:58:16 <thinfu> furthermore, with a GOOD well designed OS, theres no reason for users to NOT be able to play more of a programmer role
10:58:18 <PoppaVic> umm
10:58:23 <PoppaVic> .sigh
10:58:28 <PoppaVic> I mostly disagree
10:58:35 <docl> programmers/hackers are gifted with long attention spans that can deal with some really messy stuff
10:58:41 <PoppaVic> scripting is sorta' the exception
10:59:13 <thinfu> hello guys? i'm talking about degrees..  degrees of programming.  basic programming is within the range of any user..
10:59:23 <docl> ok I can see that
10:59:36 <docl> but the need for a distinction does exist
10:59:37 <PoppaVic> programming is NOT SCRIPTING
10:59:45 <PoppaVic> or, actually - the reverse
10:59:53 <thinfu> scripting is programming
10:59:57 <PoppaVic> "scripting is not programming"
11:00:03 <PoppaVic> sorry, I disagree
11:00:22 <PoppaVic> scriptors are unable to understand core issues and LOWER issues
11:00:33 <thinfu> anyways, simplicity makes things easier for programmers.. and by corollary, easier for users 
11:00:45 <PoppaVic> ..they bolt shit together with the absolutely most rudementary api's in mind.
11:00:55 <PoppaVic> users run programs.
11:01:06 <thinfu> the background of applications do not need to be hidden from users
11:01:24 <thinfu> the code of applications do not need to be hidden
11:01:45 <docl> you need a minimum of a certain amount of expertise/focus to solve certain problems.  Once solved, you can make them simpler to understand by properly modularizing and stuff
11:01:48 <thinfu> it does not need to be separate
11:02:23 <docl> not saying it has to be hidden absolutely, but it has to be seperated for people to not lose their train of thought too soon.
11:03:03 <thinfu> i can see regular users in a forth os using high level forth "scripting-like" language to create their own irc client by building ontop of the telnet module
11:03:06 <thinfu> for example
11:03:18 * PoppaVic sighs
11:03:19 <thinfu> or better yet
11:03:28 <PoppaVic> boy, we have come full-circle
11:03:33 <docl> hehe
11:03:34 <thinfu> to be able to change the irc program that they are using on the fly
11:03:47 <JasonWoof> cool :)
11:03:50 <thinfu> i.e. what if they want to high light some words temporarily
11:03:50 <thinfu> etc
11:03:56 <JasonWoof> got myself to finish sewing the curtain for my closet
11:04:21 <thinfu> JasonWoof: you make sure to double the thread?
11:04:22 <JasonWoof> looks a lot better that dangling my nasty worn sleeping bag on the coat-hanger pole
11:04:27 <JasonWoof> no
11:04:27 <docl> if you understand how, you can do that with any program
11:04:44 <JasonWoof> I did run out of bobbin thread in the middle though. that was annoying
11:04:52 <thinfu> heh
11:04:59 <JasonWoof> in the middle of the hardest and most visible seam
11:05:10 <JasonWoof> (the loop at the top that the pole goes htrough
11:05:11 <JasonWoof> )
11:25:38 <PoppaVic> I never did use a sewing-machine well. Saddlestiching, yeah.. I can do that.
11:26:24 <Raystm2> Who is the Aliester Crowley of programming? 
11:33:39 <PoppaVic> hrmmm... and hmm as well
11:34:06 <docl> the guy who did Java maybe?  or XML?
11:34:19 <PoppaVic> I'm staring at the vm, and trying to ascertain where order/vocs/defs belong.
11:35:08 <PoppaVic> I believe they may well NOT belong in the engine. How very odd.
11:35:28 <docl> what are orders?
11:35:45 <PoppaVic> voc-stack
11:35:58 <docl> stack of vocabularies?
11:36:08 <PoppaVic> also foo only forth, etc
11:36:23 <PoppaVic> yeah: search orders
11:37:16 <PoppaVic> crank up gforth and do "vocs cr order"
11:37:32 <PoppaVic> it's about the age of f83
11:41:31 <PoppaVic> Type `bye' to exit
11:41:31 <PoppaVic> vocs assembler ??? ??? locals-types locals environment-wordlist Root Forth  ok
11:41:31 <PoppaVic> order Forth Forth Root     Forth  ok
11:41:31 <PoppaVic> also locals definitions  ok
11:41:31 <PoppaVic> order locals Forth Forth Root     locals  ok
11:42:34 <docl> I don't understand
11:43:05 <PoppaVic> l->R: foremost vocs to search - then definitions-voc
11:43:41 <PoppaVic> it's like a shitload of C #includes, but ORDERED
11:43:51 <PoppaVic> with a "target vocabulary"
11:44:29 <PoppaVic> searching is always restricted to the 'order' - and IN ORDER
11:44:43 <PoppaVic> new defs added to 'definitions'
11:45:10 <PoppaVic> you can end up with a shitload of cross-connections between vocs
11:47:00 <PoppaVic> docl: if you come from the one-voc/any-defs universe - the idea stirs up a LOT of interest and concepts
11:48:42 <docl> I can see the flexibility of having different vocs
11:48:52 <PoppaVic> yep
11:49:05 <PoppaVic> ..and 'order' is just an array/stack
11:49:09 <docl> ok
11:49:26 <docl> but this may not belong in the engine?
11:49:35 <PoppaVic> start searching[..... vocs .....] defs[]
11:49:55 <PoppaVic> I'm thinking that vocs are really not an engine "component"
11:51:19 <PoppaVic> I'm beginning to believe that the pcode and uvars and such are instristic to a 'language'/'system', but the dictionary, order/def, vocs are an interface.
11:51:24 <thinfu> by engine you mean forth?
11:51:31 <PoppaVic> nope
11:51:39 <thinfu> then what engine are you refering to
11:51:44 <PoppaVic> I mean "engine" - forth HAS several engines
11:52:05 <PoppaVic> imagine a "turnkey" that needs no dictionary/vocs
11:52:05 <thinfu> well vocs are typically addons
11:52:12 <thinfu> if thats what you were wondering 
11:52:14 <PoppaVic> yeppers
11:52:20 <PoppaVic> not wondering at all.
11:52:57 <PoppaVic> I'm merely cogitating designs, layers and whome does what to whom.
11:55:34 <PoppaVic> It makes life evermore interesting, to think in layers.
11:56:10 <thinfu> complexifying your talk is a sure sign of shoddy thinking
11:56:19 <PoppaVic> yah, right
11:57:05 <thinfu> right
11:57:57 <docl> no, complexificating is
11:58:10 <thinfu> heheh
11:58:37 <PoppaVic> thinfu: you can chanop all you like. Meanwhile, there is a level of must-do to an API and a may-do that hands off issues <shrug> api's should handle their issues and leave a gap for growth.
11:59:22 <PoppaVic> further, I've also seen "shoddy" with OVER-simplification - and then the api is useless.
12:00:19 <PoppaVic> anyway.. I guess I've had enough today, off to "NAtional Treasure".
12:00:21 --- quit: PoppaVic ("Pulls the pin...")
12:04:43 <thinfu> reality is the final arbiter
12:06:21 <docl> yup
12:07:21 <virl> so pop isn't near to reality? or what?
12:10:32 <docl> whoever creates the best code is probably nearer reality.  in a sense
12:11:39 <thinfu> when people try to take some of the forth concepts and work on more C-like or more Java-like or more <anylanguage>-like it inevitably ends in failure
12:12:38 <virl> and what means C like in that case?
12:14:24 <thinfu> forth, in the chuck moore sense, is essentially a synergy of various tools AND programming methodology AND programming philosohy
12:14:42 <thinfu> changing any part of it carelessly makes the synergy fall apart
12:16:18 <docl> preach it, brother
12:17:20 <virl> and what means carelessly in that sense?
12:17:54 <virl> probably you'll point at me and say that I'm doing it carelessly to chuck moores ideas so the ideas of forth.
12:18:58 --- quit: saon_ ("Lost terminal")
12:19:06 <thinfu> well it probably won't be careless if the programmer actually has a grasp on the concepts first.. 
12:19:17 --- quit: saon ("Lost terminal")
12:19:46 <Raystm2> With colorforth, I notice that at the very basic level, programing this forth is a combination of tradeoffs, some conceptual, and some due to constraints.
12:20:01 <Raystm2> of course you can raise the level of constraint by being more complex.
12:20:02 <thinfu> Raystm2: yeah
12:20:44 <thinfu> you mean the conceptual tradeoffs where you have to change your perception of the problem?
12:20:47 <virl> programming forth means mostly using existing structures. which is a good approach.
12:21:02 <Raystm2> there is a bit of bondage in it. but these are mearly constraints of imagination, I suppose.
12:21:03 <thinfu> virl: huh?
12:21:24 <Raystm2> yes, thinfu, I believe you've capsulized it.
12:22:08 <virl> like using the existing text interpreter of forth and not designing a new one from the ground up.
12:23:07 <Raystm2> ya like that.
12:23:12 <virl> there is for example a couple of xml interpreter words for forth which use only the existing interpreter.
12:23:24 <virl> and so on.
12:24:02 <virl> or when something db like is made using the dictionary for data is one good choice.
12:24:32 <Raystm2> I've never tried that. :)
12:24:39 <virl> like I have a table 'blah' which is a word in the dictionary with the fields 'haha' and 'bloo'.
12:25:14 <Raystm2> oh yeah, hehe, i have done that :)
12:25:15 <virl> I started a little calendar in rf.
12:25:15 <Raystm2> oops
12:25:20 <Raystm2> cool.
12:25:45 <Raystm2> easter is the calendars funest calculation.
12:26:18 <virl> yep, time is crazy..
12:27:12 <Raystm2> Dr. John Conway has a cool way of giving the Day of the Week for any date in history. An algorithm you can do in one head.
12:27:35 <virl> I thing that reusing existing parts are a good concept of forth and so I build that into xell.
12:28:48 <Raystm2> Not only re-use, but i find that in buldling pieces of the application, you find that the pieces that go into developing more complex `things', are themselves available for execution.
12:29:08 <virl> another good concept is a simple interface to exchanging data between called code, short 'stacks'.
12:29:40 <Raystm2> seperate, as needed stacks?
12:30:11 <virl> sry, can you elaborate your thought? I can't follow.
12:32:33 <docl> like, when you build a web browser you find that you can use parts of it for viewing help files?
12:32:54 <Raystm2> I was asking, " Your concept, are you speaking of separate stacks that words use exclusively as thier interface"?
12:32:54 <thinfu> or when you build an image viewer you can use it in the web browser
12:33:10 <thinfu> forth is great for that..  i think it removes a lot of redundancies that way
12:33:33 <Raystm2> agreed
12:33:56 <docl> yeah.  but if you make an image viewer as a stand-alone, it might have a lot of baggage that isn't necessary in the web browser, bloating the browser
12:36:23 <thinfu> in forth you would be able to access the key word that handles the image viewing
12:36:28 <thinfu> without all the extras
12:36:28 <virl> yeah, for that a special of encapsulating data needs to done.
12:36:46 <thinfu> nah you don't need special encapsulating data
12:36:51 <thinfu> of*
12:37:15 <virl> I don't know what you mean exactly thinfu, can you show me an example?
12:37:38 <thinfu> : fullfeaturedimageviewer blahblahblah base-imageviewer ;
12:37:47 <thinfu> : base-imageviewer <code> ;
12:38:02 <thinfu> : web-browser blahblahblah base-imageviewer blahblah ;
12:38:05 <virl> yeah, there it's not needed.
12:38:07 <docl> right, that's the advantage of this over unix
12:38:22 <thinfu> i can't see a forth system not being open source
12:38:28 <thinfu> open source + forth.. 
12:38:30 <thinfu> = sweet
12:38:32 <thinfu> :)
12:38:53 <docl> well forth is generally public domain so ++sweet
12:39:05 <Raystm2> :)
12:39:24 <thinfu> i like GPL, i don't think linux would have been as successful if it had only been public domain
12:39:42 <docl> possibly, but it's a totally different environment than forth
12:39:49 <virl> I meant something like <assemblerpart/C part/or any other shity language part><forthpart>
12:40:11 <thinfu> virl: why
12:40:17 <thinfu> forthchip
12:40:23 <thinfu> :P
12:40:53 <thinfu> anyways i only think in terms of retroforth or ideal forth that runs ontop of forthchips
12:41:53 <virl> bah.. should I say 'ignorant'?
12:42:14 <docl> I'd consider GPL more ideal if it lapsed into public domain after a few years
12:42:26 <thinfu> docl: not a bad idea
12:42:41 <thinfu> virl: i'm not though
12:42:53 <virl> I would also like a forthchip, but it's only unrealistic.
12:43:46 <docl> the fasm license seems to be a minimalistic copyleft.
12:44:01 <virl> the reality out there in this fucking misdesigned computer world is, that everybody uses different layers on different architectures, they all can look different.
12:44:59 <crc> docl: the fasm license is pretty close to the BSD/MIT license
12:45:14 <docl> but it prevents relicensing
12:45:17 <thinfu> even so, it works out best to develop forth with as few layers in between it and the machine
12:45:21 <virl> and in this mess someone want's to put an ideal forth... it's like throwing unborn eggs out of their net.
12:46:11 <crc> docl: true, but that's the only real difference that I can see
12:46:23 <docl> isn't that the only real difference anyway?
12:46:30 <thinfu> forths that are ontop of extra layers, like ontop of C or other languages, end up mostly insignificant
12:46:45 <thinfu> for whatever reason
12:47:25 <thinfu> yes i think gforth is insignificant
12:47:37 <virl> gforth is a shitbag.
12:47:58 <thinfu> its probably the most used forth right now, right ?
12:48:09 <slava> hi
12:48:11 <docl> I guess selling bundled with proprietary stuff is the other difference
12:48:15 <thinfu> HI SLAVA
12:48:21 <docl> heya slava
12:48:28 <virl> but, it's the worst forth out there.
12:48:36 * crc could argue that OpenFirmware is the most used forth...
12:48:45 <thinfu> crc: heh, not really
12:48:46 <virl> and I think rf is more useful and more used out than gforth.
12:49:00 <thinfu> crc: s/used/programmed in/   :P
12:49:05 <crc> ok
12:49:27 <thinfu> virl: i agree that gforth is a shitbag
12:50:17 <virl> it's bloated 
12:51:20 <thinfu> it seems to me that all forths that are coded in C end up bloated anyways
12:51:36 <thinfu> F-PC, win32forth, bigforth, gforth, etc
12:51:42 <virl> I don't think so.
12:52:07 <thinfu> care to name one?
12:52:16 <docl> minforth maybe?
12:52:21 <crc> how big is bloated?
12:52:44 <virl> yes, let's define bloat in that sense.
12:53:40 <thinfu> well bloat in the case of f-pc and win32forth tends to be more in the sense of 123012401414124013231 words that nobody will ever use
12:53:45 <thinfu> why is gforth bloated?
12:54:01 <thinfu> does gforth also have 12301203103103133415 words like f-pc/win32forth ?
12:54:27 <docl> ok anti-c generalizations time
12:54:30 <thinfu> seems like bloat applies slightly differently from forth to forth
12:54:47 <virl> ok, then xell isn't bloated...
12:54:49 <thinfu> docl: ?
12:54:58 <docl> :P
12:55:05 <slava> why does number of words matter?
12:55:13 <thinfu> slava: noise
12:55:24 <slava> so the perfect forth has no words and does nothing?
12:55:26 <docl> noise is only a problem if you are easily distracted
12:55:29 <docl> like I am
12:55:47 <thinfu> too many words is noise, too little is useless
12:56:13 --- join: tathi (n=josh@pdpc/supporter/bronze/tathi) joined #forth
12:56:37 <slava> you might consider that win32forth has more features than other forths
12:58:28 <thinfu> what use is extra features if it isn't made accessible to the programmer..  i.e. by compartmentalizing the code into vocabularies, either in the forth, or in the help system..
12:58:28 <virl> I never coded anything in win32forth, should I say you why? to create a gui app wasn't anything easier than with C... when it would be done right it would be easier. rf is easier in that context.
12:59:21 <thinfu> extra features don't count unless it is easier to figure out they are there and how to use them..  but in a noisy system that is very difficult to do
12:59:36 <docl> hmm, in perl I could just look it up
12:59:43 <slava> they count to the people who use them
13:00:03 <thinfu> hence very few people use win32forth
13:00:22 <slava> and very few people use forth, period. what's your point?
13:00:39 <thinfu> right, forth in general is kinda noisy and inaccessible
13:00:50 <thinfu> something that needs to be worked on 
13:00:54 <docl> that might be a good point there
13:01:01 <thinfu> i mean look at poor docl
13:01:10 <thinfu> spending all his time in forth channels and barely knows forth ;P
13:01:12 <slava> online help is good
13:01:23 <docl> but forthers tend to have a knack for focusing despite the noise
13:01:27 <thinfu> online help is not very good
13:01:33 <thinfu> the current online help that is
13:01:55 <slava> i mean having online help makes a language more accessible
13:02:01 <thinfu> oh yeah agreed
13:02:26 <thinfu> but even so, win32forth has an extensive helpsystem..  
13:02:28 <slava> in most forths, 'see' doesn't even preserve comments
13:02:55 <thinfu> but i felt the helpsystem interface was a hindrance
13:03:32 <thinfu> if i talk anymore about this i'm gonna feel guilty about not working on retroforth's helpsystem
13:03:38 <thinfu> too late ;P
13:04:40 <docl> GUILTY!
13:04:54 <thinfu> of murder!
13:05:12 * crc is still waiting for thinfu to code the helpsystem...
13:05:36 <thinfu> :~~~(
13:05:48 <virl> rf, has a good documentation so no big problem.
13:06:25 <thinfu> being able to type HELP in rf should be a huge help though
13:07:51 <thinfu> crc: speaking of the helpsystem, we can integrate the instant messaging feature into it! ;P
13:08:39 <docl> yeah we need IM and usenet at the very minimum.
13:08:54 <thinfu> usenet can be handled in the web browser tho
13:08:55 <slava> memory leaks are annoying to track down...
13:08:57 <virl> oh.. instant messagin feature? ehm, rf users chat with each other or what?
13:09:18 <slava> i think a help system integrated with an online wiki would be nice
13:09:56 <docl> retronet, coming up soon
13:10:10 <thinfu> whoot, like skynet, except better
13:10:20 <docl> of course
13:11:14 <thinfu> terminator 3 was good cuz it fixed all the holes
13:18:22 * crc could tie the word "help" to the glossary of words (this would be very easy to do)
13:19:15 <thinfu> the glossary of words being in a text file?
13:19:22 <crc> in a blockfile
13:19:44 <docl> sounds like a plan
13:19:47 <crc> it's already formatted at 64 chars/line, just needs a bit of tweaking to make each entry on a separate block
13:20:04 <thinfu> crc: nah put it in a text file, not blockfile, so that it remains accessible from outside rf
13:20:14 <thinfu> unless you plan on having two copies
13:20:18 <crc> Sure
13:20:26 <crc> two copies are as easy as one :)
13:20:45 <slava> use a program to pad each line with whitespace
13:24:15 <docl> I made a quick and dirty script to create input for the retro editor
13:24:49 <thinfu> show it :)
13:24:58 <docl> in the darcs repo
13:25:02 <thinfu> oh
13:25:06 <docl> scripts/t2b
13:26:07 <docl> also there's a b2t script that makes them into text files
13:48:16 --- quit: sproingie (Remote closed the connection)
14:41:46 --- join: TheBlueWizard (i=TheBlueW@ts001d0827.wdc-dc.xod.concentric.net) joined #forth
15:17:39 --- join: Pepe_Le_Pew (n=User@201008249014.user.veloxzone.com.br) joined #forth
15:31:04 --- part: TheBlueWizard left #forth
15:32:29 --- join: saon (i=1000@c-24-129-89-116.hsd1.fl.comcast.net) joined #forth
15:32:43 --- join: saon_ (i=1000@c-24-129-89-116.hsd1.fl.comcast.net) joined #forth
15:54:20 --- quit: virl (Remote closed the connection)
16:16:20 --- quit: Raystm2 ("User pushed the X - because it's Xtra, baby")
17:35:53 --- quit: crc ()
17:37:38 --- join: crc (i=crc@pool-70-20-244-228.phil.east.verizon.net) joined #forth
17:37:57 --- mode: ChanServ set +o crc
17:40:39 <JasonWoof> in Linux, how do I access files on a fat32 disk?
17:41:27 <saon> mount /dev/(windows drive, partition) /mnt/(mount point)
17:41:34 <slava> -t vfat
17:41:36 <saon> might require -t vfat or -t msdos
17:41:49 <slava> depending on if you want long file names or not
17:42:01 <slava> i guess usually you want -t vfat...
17:42:05 <JasonWoof> huh
17:42:38 <JasonWoof> oh god
17:42:42 <JasonWoof> oops
17:42:43 <saon> JasonWoof: what device is your fat32 disk?
17:42:50 <JasonWoof> I was doing /dev/hda instead of /dev/hda1
17:42:56 <saon> ah, that'll do it
17:42:59 <JasonWoof> vfat worked fine now
17:43:08 <JasonWoof> thanks for the help
17:43:54 * slava once passed /dev/ad0 instead of /dev/ad0s3 to the bsdlabel utility and blew away his partition table
17:44:12 <JasonWoof> oops
18:06:12 --- join: TheBlueWizard (i=TheBlueW@ts001d0715.wdc-dc.xod.concentric.net) joined #forth
18:48:35 --- quit: madgarden ("?OUT OF DATA  ERROR")
18:49:24 --- join: madgarden (n=madgarde@London-HSE-ppp3545852.sympatico.ca) joined #forth
18:57:02 <thinfu> hmm, i suppose i should label my partitions
18:57:24 <thinfu> pff, no reiserfs label utility on hand
18:58:10 --- join: Raystm2 (n=Raystm2@adsl-68-95-254-73.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth
19:00:15 --- quit: tathi ("leaving")
19:08:56 --- join: zlynx` (i=[8y27MMY@panix1.panix.com) joined #forth
19:09:24 --- part: zlynx` left #forth
19:30:32 --- part: TheBlueWizard left #forth
19:56:29 --- join: snoopy_16 (i=snoopy_1@dsl-084-058-137-031.arcor-ip.net) joined #forth
20:03:50 <Pepe_Le_Pew> i need a basic tutorial about stack based interpreters
20:04:01 <Pepe_Le_Pew> i'm writing one interpreter 
20:04:33 <Pepe_Le_Pew> i'm still thinking about the language structure
20:04:45 <Pepe_Le_Pew> but i need to verify my basic stack operations
20:05:30 --- quit: madgarden (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
20:05:31 --- quit: skylan (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
20:05:31 --- quit: ianp (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
20:05:31 <thinfu> what kind of tutorial?
20:05:31 <thinfu> like
20:05:33 <thinfu> 1 2 +
20:05:35 <thinfu> dup
20:05:37 <thinfu> etc ?
20:06:15 <Pepe_Le_Pew> yes
20:06:24 <Pepe_Le_Pew> i need to be sure
20:06:39 <Pepe_Le_Pew> what is "over"
20:06:51 <Pepe_Le_Pew> what is the difference between swap and rot
20:06:51 <Pepe_Le_Pew> etc
20:07:02 <thinfu> there's some tutorials at http://forth.bespin.org/
20:07:28 --- join: ianp (n=ian@inpuj.com) joined #forth
20:07:28 --- join: skylan (n=sjh@dialup-216-211-47-87.tbaytel.net) joined #forth
20:07:58 <Pepe_Le_Pew> ty
20:13:20 <Pepe_Le_Pew> hm
20:13:32 <Pepe_Le_Pew> should i implement rot left and rot right ?
20:13:48 <thinfu> the opposite of rot is -rot
20:14:16 <Pepe_Le_Pew> ok
20:14:28 <thinfu> rot and -rot can be implemented in forth
20:15:02 --- quit: Snoopy42 (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
20:15:18 --- nick: snoopy_16 -> Snoopy42
20:16:14 <Pepe_Le_Pew> i dont know if i will follow forth strucutre
20:16:16 <Pepe_Le_Pew> *structure
20:16:39 <Pepe_Le_Pew> i liked postscript
20:17:12 <Pepe_Le_Pew> im thinking about mixing pascal/postscript 
20:25:36 <thinfu> postscript is nice
21:20:26 --- join: aum (n=aum@60-234-156-82.bitstream.orcon.net.nz) joined #forth
22:32:39 --- quit: JasonWoof ("bed")
22:41:21 --- join: I440r (i=I440r@rrcs-24-242-160-169.sw.biz.rr.com) joined #forth
23:54:10 <warpzero> more like I440p
23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/05.09.11