00:00:00 --- log: started forth/05.09.12 00:51:32 --- quit: derv0 (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 00:52:33 --- join: derv0 (n=derv0@proxy1.nscl.msu.edu) joined #forth 03:03:48 --- quit: derv0 (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 03:05:17 --- join: derv0 (n=derv0@proxy1.nscl.msu.edu) joined #forth 03:37:09 --- quit: Pepe_Le_Pew (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 03:39:40 --- join: Pepe_Le_Pew (n=User@201008249014.user.veloxzone.com.br) joined #forth 04:54:24 --- quit: crc (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 05:15:22 --- quit: aum () 05:38:38 --- join: amca (n=plump@as-bri-4-1-169.ozonline.com.au) joined #forth 06:01:59 --- join: aardvarx (n=folajimi@shell3.sea5.speakeasy.net) joined #forth 06:02:23 I440r, morning. 06:02:56 Quartus, greetings. 06:09:18 I just learned about "reverse Polish" notation last week; Will I have to comprehend this notation before I can use Forth? 06:09:47 Pretty much. It is how everything is expressed in Forth 06:10:58 I guess I understand how operations can be performed on two numbers; what if multiple items need to be operated on? 06:11:31 Like adding 3 numbers? 06:11:45 --- join: Ray_work (n=vircuser@adsl-65-68-201-174.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth 06:11:51 --- join: madwork (n=foo@derby.metrics.com) joined #forth 06:12:26 Yes. 06:12:40 In fact, I'm looking at http://www.calculator.org/rpn.html right now. 06:12:42 morning :) 06:12:54 2 3 4 + + would add three numbers 06:13:01 Ray_work: Good evening! 06:13:11 3 2 1 + x 06:13:23 That just looks soooo wrong! 06:13:50 as in 3 2 1 + * ? 06:13:55 Yes. 06:14:22 Well it only looks wrong because you are used to infix, not postfix. It is just a different way of looking at things, no more ore less valid than infix. 06:14:30 It looks like something I could be arrested for. 06:14:33 :P 06:15:04 So that's what postfix means! 06:15:35 I've seen it for years now (especially when I'm compiling code for Linux systems, but I never really thought much of it. 06:15:39 (1 + 3) infix, (+ 1 3) prefix, (1 3 +) postfix notations 06:16:09 Let me guess, prefix is used in some cases? 06:16:24 Languages like lisp use prefix notation. Forth and Postscript use postfix, algebra and arithmetic you learn at school is infix. 06:17:48 Is any of the three better than the others? 06:18:04 Nope 06:18:26 Like I said before, they are different. 06:18:46 Although postfix notation is particularly more useful when parsing computer languages apparently 06:19:10 I guess it's a "choose your weapon" or "pick your poison" issue. 06:19:30 Mainly because unlike infix notation, pre- and postfix notation never require brackets 06:19:32 I see it that way. 06:20:49 Mathematically, I think post/prefix is more elgant, but infix is easier to deaal with because of cultual conditioning. 06:21:35 According to the Forth Interest Group (FIG), Forth is present in many forms; dare I say ubiquitous? 06:22:21 Apparently, FreeBSD uses it for the initial stage of the boot process. 06:23:07 I wouldnt say ubiquitous. Im only a Forth newbie, but it seems to me like Forth is more of a niche language. Designed for small memory programs rather than large monolithic gui applications. 06:23:31 If that is the case, does that mean it is closer to assembly language than most other languages? 06:23:45 In my opinion, definately 06:24:30 Do you know about Forth's single most prominant feature being that it is a stack based language/virtual machine? 06:25:37 I did not know that. 06:26:14 Ah 06:26:57 use it is a stack based language, postfix notation is particularly appropriate for it. You understand postfix more if you have an idea what the stack is doing 06:28:35 eg with 1 2 3 + +, '1' pushes the number 1 onto the stack, as similarly '2' and '3' pushes those number onto the stack. 06:29:29 I keep hearing about the "stack notation" part; 06:29:30 '+' which is referred to as a 'word', rather than 'function' like in other languages, then operates on the top two items on the stack, adding them, and then pushes the result back onto the stack 06:30:06 + ( n n -- n ) 06:30:07 Your example is rather similar to the one at the link I referred to earlier. 06:30:22 * amca nods 06:30:26 Ray_work, now that is just wrong! 06:30:41 :) 06:30:45 :P 06:31:01 then the second '+' pops that result off of the stack, and then the '1' and adds them, then pushes the result back onto the stack. 06:31:11 no, it's the correct stack map for `+' 06:31:30 + takes 2 numbers and leaves one on the top of the stack. 06:32:13 aardvarx: Have you seen http://home.iae.nl/users/mhx/sf.html ? 06:32:33 I guess it's simple enough when you're repeating the same operation; what I am really interested in is what happens when you have to deal with operations when you need to have some operations take precedence over others. 06:32:53 amca, nope. I will right now, though. 06:33:17 aardvarx: The thing about postfix and prefix is that there is no such thing as operator precedencs to worry about. 06:33:37 Operator precedence is like a hack or kludge in infix notation so that it works 06:34:27 Ray_work: How goes it? 06:34:50 For instance, 1 + 2 * 3 06:34:59 amca: it goes well, how's by you? 06:35:26 Ray_work: Ive been slack and self indulgent lately >.> 06:35:34 2 3 * 1 + 06:35:42 or 1 2 3 * + 06:36:31 ya, live your bliss :) 06:36:44 actually, I think 1 2 3 + * 06:37:04 nope, that is (2 + 3) * 1 06:37:30 Mea culpa. 06:37:44 + pops 2 and 3 off the stack and multiplies them. 5 is then pushed onto the stack, and then 5 is multiplied by 1 06:39:10 + pops 2 and 3 off the stack and.... ? 06:39:12 :) 06:39:42 erm...adds them 06:39:47 whoops lmao 06:40:24 or is it that + takes the number pointed to by the stack pointer and adds it into the number that is in EAX which is the "top of the stack". 06:40:39 then adusts the stack pointer down 1 06:40:59 Ray_work: I think that that is waaay to advanced for aardvarx to worry about :P 06:41:11 hehe 06:41:24 sorry, also way to advanced for moi 06:41:42 Too advanced for you? 06:42:05 I think getting ones head around the stack and postfix notation are heavy enough for a newbie to post/prefix langs. 06:42:16 It is a shame we learn infix in school 06:42:39 imagine algebra or calculus in post/prefix 06:43:03 gives ya the shivers :) 06:43:41 gives me excited shivers. After all, infix/postfix/prefix - iut is all just cultural conditioning. 06:44:06 that dang cultural conditioning. 06:44:15 always getting in the way. 06:44:31 Yeah, it stops me from being able to wear my GFs bras to work ;) 06:45:23 It is well more than I can comprehend at this point. 06:45:45 hehe 06:45:51 aardvarx: you will consume more forth. 06:45:58 eat a bra. 06:46:15 infix those nipples 06:46:16 Ray_work: o-kay.... :) 06:46:18 lol 06:47:06 Too bad working with Forth requires this preparation; I was hoping I could just "dive in" like with C. 06:47:30 you just dove into `c'? how brilliant are you? 06:47:37 It is a completely different paradigm. 06:47:56 Ray_work: C - easy to get started in, hard to be expert in? 06:48:02 you cannot recall the awful struggle you had triing to figure out how to input text or something? 06:48:31 brain has the capacity to mask out horror. 06:48:40 hehe. Like C? ;P 06:48:42 you only remember the good times 06:48:57 Ray_work, it was neither a breeze nor torture. 06:49:02 I only remember the fu...good times, yeah... 06:49:46 I remember a little mama, face like a keyboard but boy could she interpret and compile. 06:49:54 Now Forth... is a completely different story. 06:50:35 Talk about a paradigm shift! 06:50:53 it's the most natural way a computer works 06:51:02 think from the computers perspective 06:51:15 1+2*3 06:51:59 Does the computer take in all the numbers before trying to decipher which operation comes first? 06:52:15 a computer doesn't handle that expression naturaly, having to store the 1 will it waits for the 2 06:52:20 yes 06:52:25 yes it absolutely does. 06:52:39 it puts these numbers in seperate registers. 06:52:44 infact 06:53:41 1 goes on the return stack, then + which pops 1 into eax ( say ) and then the + waits for the next number to put in another register before it calls itself. 06:54:04 --- join: JasonWoof (n=jason@pdpc/supporter/student/Herkamire) joined #forth 06:54:04 --- mode: ChanServ set +o JasonWoof 06:54:19 it does exacly what forth does, save that forth exposes that whole mechanism to you . 06:54:22 hi JasonWoof :) 06:54:41 According to amca, precedence DNE for postfix or prefix. 06:54:58 hi Ray_work :) 06:55:00 DNE? 06:55:09 Does Not Exist 06:55:15 hows your vm comming JasonWoof ? 06:55:31 the vm is pretty much finished 06:55:40 I'll just need to add some sort of persistance to it at some point 06:55:55 well, in postfix the presidence is what ever operator you happen to have next in line. 06:56:22 forth has no precedence, or any possible way to have it 06:56:36 the stuff on the left executes first 06:56:38 Ray_work, no cheating. 06:56:48 operator organizing precidence where you are the operator. 06:56:55 not because of precedence, but because the stuff to the right hasn't been parsed yet 06:56:59 Let me ask JasonWoof the same question I asked you earlier. 06:57:06 --- quit: derv0 (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 06:57:51 JasonWoof, how would Forth handle 1 + 2 * 3 as an operation? 06:58:13 --- join: derv0 (n=derv0@proxy1.nscl.msu.edu) joined #forth 06:59:08 2 3 * 1 + 06:59:26 How about 3 2 1 * + ? 06:59:27 crc: might use the word `later' to make that infix work. 06:59:41 aardvarx: that's harder to read/debug. 06:59:47 Aha! 06:59:51 aardvarx: good example though... because you got it wrong 06:59:52 : later pop pop swap push push : 07:00:09 right JasonWoof = 6 07:00:17 I got it wrong? 07:00:26 sorry JasonWoof = 7 07:00:30 aardvarx = 6 07:00:30 yes. you multiplyied 2 by 1 07:00:43 Sounds more like I sucker-punched Forth. 07:00:47 math operators work on the newest stuff on the stack 07:00:54 "top" of stack 07:00:59 I see. 07:01:17 JasonWoof is that EAX? 07:01:20 with my notation, you can easily chunk it 07:01:31 I don't know x86 asm, sorry. I'm a ppc dude 07:02:13 with this: 2 3 * 1 + you can chuck it into meaningful parts easily: 07:02:16 aardvarx: If you worry about registers at this stage, you are just gonna get confused. And different implementation smay use registers different ways. 07:02:17 "2" take the number 2 07:02:22 "3 *" multiply by three 07:02:28 "1 +" add one 07:02:59 forth was not designed for register machines 07:03:00 amca, thanks for pointing that out. So, I guess I just need to stick with understanding RPN at this stage? 07:03:17 heh 07:03:20 don't think about rpn 07:03:22 there's no syntax 07:03:33 forth just reads into the next space, and executes/compiles whatever it finds 07:03:40 then does it again 07:03:55 when you see a number , think put that plate on the stack, then when you see an operator, think, what is the stack diagram for that operation and what is the results. 07:04:00 it ends up mostly looking like rpn, but does not actually work that way 07:04:01 --- join: PoppaVic (n=pete@0-2pool238-43.nas24.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 07:04:15 PoppaVic ! 07:04:24 G'day 07:04:38 so far... 07:05:00 PoppaVic, morning. 07:05:01 is there some way to get a bunch of files from a tarbal, and create a tarbal of just those files? 07:05:02 Gday 07:05:07 Howdy 07:05:11 PoppaVic: YOu from Victoria? 07:05:12 (without unpacking them to the HD first) 07:05:15 JasonWoof: sure 07:05:19 oh. 07:05:35 hmm.. you mean a inter-tar transfer? Never heard of one 07:05:41 ok 07:05:47 hex editor :) 07:05:53 lol 07:05:57 would be useful 07:05:59 you COULD create a subtar for a supertar 07:06:04 because tar preserves creators 07:06:13 sure, do it all the time 07:06:15 cool. 07:06:26 learn a new thing everyday. 07:06:43 you might be able to extract to stdout andpipe it around 07:06:59 yeah, I saw that option, and wondered if it would be useful 07:07:09 but I think you just get a cat of the file contents 07:07:22 I'm partial to dirs and midnight-commander ;-) 07:07:24 Forth: Looks like RPM, Walks like RPN, Talks like RPN; but is not RPN. 07:07:32 Is that a fair assessment? 07:07:41 oh well, I can just spew out the files and then tar and delete 07:07:58 aardvarx: well, there's some stuff that's not rpn 07:08:04 like : create variable constant 07:08:19 Hmm. 07:08:33 and you can certainly create more 07:08:36 * aardvarx needs to get a reliable resource on Forth. 07:09:05 I'm just saying that RPN is a description of what it looks like, not the mechanism by which it works 07:09:18 That's much clearer. 07:09:31 and given that the mechanism by which it really does work is soooooo simple, I prefer to think in terms of how it really does work 07:10:02 JasonWoof: How do you visualise it working? 07:10:07 --- join: PoppaVic_ (n=pete@0-1pool72-48.nas24.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 07:10:11 1) read into the next space 07:10:15 2) execute/compile it 07:10:17 --- quit: PoppaVic (Nick collision from services.) 07:10:21 3) repeat 07:10:21 --- nick: PoppaVic_ -> PoppaVic 07:10:22 hehe 07:10:29 goddamned isp 07:10:30 4) Underflow! 07:10:32 ;) 07:10:40 sorry, did I miss something? 07:10:55 So, when you said that I "got it wrong" earlier... you mean I am responsible for feeding the operands correctly? 07:11:02 yes 07:11:10 yes, forth is even more free-style than C 07:11:17 3 * 2 + 1 is not the same as 1 + 2 * 3 then. 07:11:20 aardvarx: you put the arguments/operations in the wrong order 07:11:27 it'll bliethely let you blow yer DICK off, in _addition_ to your foot. 07:12:11 No wonder the Wikipedia article was so negative about it. 07:12:20 you can do: 2 3 * 1 + ---or--- 1 2 3 * + 07:12:23 no, amca - from NA;CONUS;MI 07:12:33 aardvarx: Most applicationsa for it are foe embedded devices. 07:12:42 but: 3 2 1 * + will give you a different result 07:12:56 PoppaVic: Ah, tnx 07:13:07 oh.. so forth is now a "negative language"? 07:13:32 what's a negative language? 07:13:38 aardvarx: if yer lookin' for cutesy, hand-holding languages: forth is nowhere near the top of the list. 07:14:00 * JasonWoof thinks forth is cute 07:15:00 PoppaVic, just a sec. 07:15:04 : FORTH BEGIN LATHER RINSE REPEAT ; 07:15:37 : lather bl word find ; 07:15:45 aardvarx: If you wanna worry about hardware implementations of forth, look at www.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/stack_computers/ 07:16:14 It used to be that forth was usually the first language on new micros. 07:16:15 : rinse if state if execute else compile then exit then do-number ; 07:16:24 ..anymore, this is sorta' moot 07:16:28 One result has been a proliferation of nonstandard Forth systems by hobbyists, often of indifferent quality and with poor documentation. A newcomer to the language may download a free version from the net, have problems and dismiss the language without further consideration, mistaking a poor implementation for a fundamentally flawed language. 07:16:55 there is no "standard 'Forth'" - never was. 07:17:03 FIG was about the closest. 07:17:12 Not that the languages is negative, but that there is no hand holding. 07:17:21 *language* 07:17:28 F79 was never liked, F83 was ok, and then ANS got involved. 07:18:20 aardvarx: to the quote from the article: I'd suggest the author was either wrong, pedantic or a lisper. 07:18:38 It sounds like handing someone whose never handled a firearm an Eight-guage shotgun. 07:18:55 "intifferent quality" is a strange term. 07:19:09 Odds are the individual will end up in the ICU, or the morgue. 07:19:13 hmm, you mean the post sounded extremely-biased and twisted? yes. 07:19:21 I'm not sure about this hand-holding business 07:19:25 forth is extremely easy to learn 07:19:29 it's a bit confusing 07:19:33 but doesn't take long 07:19:57 JasonWoof, exactly my point. 07:20:04 JasonWoof: "hand-holding" is what I refer to for folks that have no idea what a ptr, an int ot a string are - and can't imagine tracking malloc/free, etc. 07:20:11 dang, I forget the numbers, but I think Forth ink said they spent about an hour training new employees to use forth, and after a day they were really productive with it 07:20:14 'Tis easy to pull the trigger. 07:20:30 what do you mean by "tracking malloc/free"? 07:20:52 amca, I think allocating/deallocating memory. 07:21:02 recall though: Places like FOrth, Inc. are going to have all the usual tools... Compilers, linkers, loaders, etc. 07:21:25 right: forth and C expect the programmer to take responsibility. 07:21:57 I think the reason forth is not terribly popular is that it doesn't appear to be the "tool for the job" to many people 07:22:03 prolly 07:22:05 eg perl and php are what you should learn to do web scripting 07:22:12 " There's a place for us... somewhere a place for us..." 07:22:14 C to write unix and windoze apps 07:22:17 etc 07:22:30 What is a scripting language? 07:22:33 but nobody says "oh you want to do X, well then you should learn forth" 07:22:41 python = scripting lang 07:23:04 an "interpreter" - BASIC or sh or whatever - this is an "interpreter" 07:23:11 I knew that; I guess I don't understand what the "scripting" means. 07:23:22 PoppaVic, whoa there! 07:23:36 I thought HTML is an interpreted language? 07:23:38 colorforth = scriping lang for OKADII 07:23:42 scripting means you write text and it stays text - just interpreted over and over 07:23:53 I'd say forth is kinda in the bin with python in that I can't think of a particular application that is the normal language to use for 07:24:03 aardvarx: No. HTML is just a mark-up language - it only says what should be there, not how it should act. 07:24:08 html is not a programming language 07:24:08 WYSIWYG, no compiler needed, right? 07:24:10 JasonWoof: Poscript 07:24:37 PoppaVic: what about Postscript? 07:24:44 forth HAS an interpreter, and a compiler, and a code-interpreter, etc. 07:24:52 JasonWoof: it's a forth-variant, is all 07:25:08 there is also some cad/cam thingie that uses a variant 07:25:09 aardvarx: html is a document format. like jpeg, PNG, .doc etc 07:25:25 Hmm. 07:25:27 All postfix stack languages by their nature are Forth variants 07:25:29 Interesting. 07:25:41 amca: mostly-true, not entirely 07:26:00 PoppaVic: Can you think of examples where it isnt true? 07:26:04 forth is merely the easiest to get a grip on and spin like mad 07:26:38 amca: maybe lispers can. And, of course, the PF SL stuff doesn't HAVE to look & feel like forth 07:27:03 PoppaVic: LISP is prefix, not postfix 07:27:17 I think forth is also not terribly popular right now because it does not match the latest buzzwords and programming paradigms that people are obsessed about nowadays like OOP 07:27:25 amca: dunno. I don't lisp. Maybe it is, or maybe it's a layer over it? 07:27:36 JasonWoof: always true 07:27:39 people come in and ask if it does OOP and continuations and XXX 07:27:56 they do the same in C - daily 07:27:56 LISP is a prefix, recursive (as opposed to iterative like Forth) language 07:27:58 forth says "you don't need that crap, but if you really want you could write it" 07:28:04 and they think forth sucks and move on 07:28:27 I think its a language whose time has not yet come. 07:28:39 woh! who said forth was iterative and not recursive? 07:29:03 it's time has come and gone, mostly because people want bells&whistles and hand-holding. 07:29:08 I do more recursion than looping in forth 07:29:33 I always felt the Gforth team dropped the ball as hard as the gcc folks did. 07:29:36 The more I think of it, the worse scripting languages look. 07:29:52 PoppaVic: Imn what sense? 07:30:00 aardvarx: what sort of languages? 07:30:18 aardvarx: you mean like bash? 07:30:32 JasonWoof and Perl. 07:30:49 Well, they got an opportunity.. and they neglected both a simple ABI header/file/doc for both, and the inability for Gforth to create/use objects/libs likee gcc 07:30:51 The worst offender: Tcl/Tk 07:31:12 I've heard the term "glue code" 07:31:12 * amca nods 07:31:17 yeppers 07:31:32 everything uses glue or "wrappers" anymore 07:31:34 dont' get any on ya 07:31:48 Who said arlier that they do PPC? 07:31:49 i'll get a towel 07:31:55 JasonWoof 07:32:13 JasonWoof: You ever played with the Open Firmware Forth interface? 07:32:55 amca: yeah 07:33:00 Scripting Language == Government Bureaucracy?? 07:33:01 PoppaVic: What Forth flavours do you like? 07:33:01 wrote a little OS on top of it 07:33:13 JasonWoof: sweet. How do you find it? 07:33:30 didn't do a whole lot with it. it's pretty much just designed for looking at the device tree and getting your bootloader started 07:33:37 Is that a fair assessment? 07:33:48 aardvarx: no 07:33:48 aardvarx: No. 07:34:05 Okay. 07:34:08 aardvarx: More that ppl like easily accessable stuff 07:34:12 aardvarx: scripting languages tend to be quite useful for some things 07:34:18 amca: well, I've a couple installed. Gforth is prolly the best for help (see) and docs; PFE is also sort of fun. 07:34:26 aardvarx: eg bash is very good for writing little shell scripts to call your favorite programms just so 07:34:31 JasonWoof: I dont suppose you have the code for the OS still? 07:34:45 little things like this: exec w3m http://herkamire.com/jason/`echo "$*" | sed 's/[^a-zA-Z0-9._]/_/g'` 07:35:04 amca: yeah 07:35:08 JasonWoof: yeah, one-shot tasks reusing useful programs 07:35:23 amca: I had most of it. I just had to hack the i/o routines, and work something up to save directly to the HD 07:35:48 JasonWoof: Would you mind if I had a look at it? 07:36:11 I gotta' somehow reorganize these damned headers better. *sigh* 07:36:27 PoppaVic: Headers? 07:36:35 I440r seems to be MIA; does anyone know how I can get a Forth environment on my system? 07:36:38 yeah, for my vm. 07:36:39 As in the crop harvesting thing? 07:36:45 ah 07:36:54 Speaking of vm... 07:36:56 aardvarx: get at least gforth 07:36:57 PoppaVic: What lang? 07:37:04 amca: http://herkamire.com/jason/herkforth 07:37:12 JasonWoof: tnx 07:37:20 amca: I live in C, and am shooting for a forthish-vm for a variety of tasks 07:37:29 That's right 07:37:42 amca mentioned earlier that Forth is a vm... 07:37:50 sorry about the slugish server, I'm running a backup atm 07:37:50 Is that like VMware? 07:37:51 sure 07:38:01 aardvarx: dunno' the context 07:38:17 amca: oh, sorry, looks like there's no bootable version on the site 07:38:39 the tool I want, written in C, would allow multiple programs to run an "extensible, interpretative-compiler" 07:38:53 06:13 < amca> Do you know about Forth's single most prominant feature being 07:38:58 that it is a stack based language/virtual machine? 07:39:08 JasonWoof: That's okay. I dont have a PPC machine :( 07:39:14 PoppaVic, does that help? 07:39:16 amca: do you have linux ? 07:39:21 yep 07:39:23 ahh 07:39:30 amca: herkforth-bin run's quite well under qemu 07:39:34 * aardvarx does 'emerge gforth' ... :) 07:39:41 yeah, ok - I think I track again... Yeah, it'd be VMware by that def 07:39:45 * JasonWoof waves the gentoo flag 07:39:55 Wow, that was quick! 07:40:09 aardvarx: gforth is mostly written in gforth 07:40:12 I think... 07:40:22 s/'// 07:40:25 JasonWoof, that doesn't even make any sense! 07:40:31 I'd like my C to obviate asm - and the vm to obviate, but enable C "extension" is all. 07:40:31 JasonWoof: I think it compiles from C then bootstraps itself 07:40:41 aardvarx: what? 07:40:51 gforth is mostly written in gforth 07:40:56 amca: get the binary 07:40:57 O_o 07:41:07 amca: it does use gcc, and it does metacompile the forth-image 07:41:07 amca: herkforth-bin it comes with a script to run under qemu 07:41:18 What sort of heresy is that? 07:41:34 Chicken or egg: which came first? 07:41:52 gforth's tarball ./configures and builds fine 07:42:05 herkforth is going through major major changes 07:42:16 JasonWoof: tnx 07:42:16 ..and frankly, you'll want to spend time glaring at assorted source for it anyway 07:42:23 PoppaVic: That's what I said :P 07:42:30 haven't released a version in a while because I keep braking/rewriting things 07:42:44 aardvarx: Machine language, then assembly, then HLLs 07:43:10 I've just started rewriting herkforth for a virtual machine tathi and I made up 07:43:10 hehe 07:43:12 don't forget cross-compilers or meta-compilers 07:43:18 There's another mystery that has never been explained. 07:43:33 aardvarx: Virtual machines? 07:43:37 How did the first compiler come into existence? 07:43:45 hand 07:43:50 JasonWoof: How far along are you with tathi? 07:43:52 aardvarx: someone coded a LOT of mc 07:43:54 eeew! 07:44:13 amca: huh? tathi implemented the virtual machine. I'm just starting to port to it 07:44:13 Say it ain't so! 07:44:21 PoppaVic: Surely the first compiler was in asm? 07:44:35 hehe - I can remember going to shops in A2 - as a kid - and seeing stuff like IMSAI kits ;-) 07:44:41