00:00:00 --- log: started forth/06.07.19 01:31:50 --- quit: docl (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 02:42:06 --- join: yoyofreeman (n=root@219.144.136.173) joined #forth 04:18:50 what's the stack pic for rot? 04:19:08 and for over? 04:21:18 hullew? is this thing on? 04:26:31 over ( a b -- a b a ) 04:26:58 rot ( a b c -- b c a ) 04:27:40 tyvm rob 04:31:33 --- join: PoppaVic (n=pete@0-1pool46-240.nas30.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 04:31:46 morning Vic 04:32:58 Mornin' 04:34:57 . 04:51:32 humph 04:51:44 I'm wheel-spinning, dang-it 04:51:50 on what? 04:52:23 I'm trying to visualize the core plugin, and what I'd minimally require - loading or replacing it. 04:52:38 k 04:53:31 I'd planned to have main/code load one sym from the dll, and run that to do all the loading. 04:53:36 or overloading. 04:53:50 what's the source language of your forth? 04:54:17 the guts are written in plain ol' C - c99 to make some stuff happier. 04:54:34 (no c99 voodoo involved) 04:54:41 ok, so the engine is writ in C and the modules are forthcode? 04:55:06 Nope, all the primitive stuff is C - C is considered "the assembler" 04:55:11 k 04:55:30 With luck, it should be fairly widely portable. 04:57:37 However, we need to mechanically generate the basic dictionary of wordlists+words. And, I'm trying to get my head into the space where we can replace the low-level module (core) completely, or load later modules which may replace some elements. Atop the basic deferred, replace, etc. 04:57:58 I'm trying to "see" what I need and how to lay out some basics is all. 04:59:38 It reminds me a lot of what I vaguely recall seeing in the ancient 8080 & z80 FIG-forth source ;-) 05:02:59 hmm 05:03:36 Quiznos: to build a wrench, to need a lathe and a forge, to build a lathe you need.... ;-) 05:04:21 rubber and diamonds 05:04:37 I don't need diamonds, or rubbers ;-) 05:05:16 the rubber and diamonds arent for you 05:05:25 oh.. OK ;-) 05:05:28 rubber to spin the wheel from the drive shaft 05:05:40 and diamonds to trim the whatever your shaping 05:05:43 pff 05:05:45 heh 05:06:03 unless you have a lathe-of-wood 05:06:18 Anyway, yeah... xrefs all over. I'm trying to organize their construction to provide the replaceble core. 05:06:42 i wish i'd been here since you started this project then i'd have a better mental picture 05:06:47 "For want of a nail.." ;-) 05:07:06 i lack much info to actually help, but keep telling me stuff 05:07:29 Oh, I could spin you up to speed in a few hours, maybe days - but everyone keeps looking for specific documents and then sorta' idles off and out 05:07:30 what's in the c-code 05:07:39 gimme src? 05:07:49 :) 05:07:50 I can try.. lemme look here for a sec.. 05:07:53 k 05:07:53 --- join: tathi (n=josh@pdpc/supporter/bronze/tathi) joined #forth 05:08:00 tat 05:08:26 tathi what do you do, start another irssi to join here? 05:09:25 huh? 05:09:38 or do you renick? 05:10:11 irssi is the client that I use 05:10:22 but it sounds like you're asking something else that I don't understand 05:10:26 k 05:15:22 PoppaVic heh 05:35:27 omg i found a patent for a metacompiler 05:36:39 http://www.freshpatents.com/Adaptive-interface-for-a-software-development- 05:36:54 oops 05:36:56 http://www.freshpatents.com/Adaptive-interface-for-a-software-development- 05:36:57 [00 environment-dt20041111ptan20040226004.php?type=description 05:37:03 you have to join those two lines 05:38:51 eruh? 05:39:07 rm the `[00]' text and rm the intervening spaces 05:39:27 http://www.freshpatents.com/Adaptive-interface-for-a-software-development-environment-dt20041111ptan20040226004.php?type=description 05:39:37 ty 05:40:47 I dunno' how people can read thru such noise. 05:41:32 we're not sposed to 05:42:17 Then it isn't much use. 05:42:34 ..more like docs outta' congress 05:43:06 heh 05:43:53 heh - or std-committees ;-> 05:44:00 any committee 05:45:28 Did you get that email, yet? 05:47:40 yes, listed well. 05:47:42 tyvm 05:47:47 np 05:48:11 Anytime you joine #Metabuilder, we can thrash on it ;-) 05:48:55 I hate to debate issues in #forth, because I simply want to destroy some facets of forths. 05:49:24 uh huh; alterior motives! 05:49:56 no, actually, I had hoped to coerce Ficl, or gforth, or pfe - but too many probs. 05:49:58 you'll have to remind me, i've already corked my ears to prevent leakage 05:50:05 k 05:50:07 NP. 05:50:09 --- join: wart (n=wart@213.219.249.64) joined #forth 05:50:28 ..and, trying to read the gforth source is like trying to read the gcc source 05:51:01 heh 05:57:46 --- join: timlarson_ (n=timlarso@65.116.199.19) joined #forth 05:59:50 yoyofreeman i found your page!!! :) 06:00:06 yoyofreeman i see stars 06:06:35 PoppaVic 06:06:40 hmm? 06:06:46 i found your url; you tease, you did write docs!!@ 06:06:54 well, some 06:07:01 you've been holding out 06:07:11 ..a lot of them, for this project, are just tentative notes/ideas 06:07:21 that's better than NULL 06:07:24 It's been something bugging me for deacdes 06:07:27 ok, i gotta go forage 06:07:29 bbl 06:07:38 so'k 06:25:45 --- join: PoppaVic1 (n=pete@0-1pool64-184.nas22.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 06:26:01 --- quit: PoppaVic (Nick collision from services.) 06:26:03 --- nick: PoppaVic1 -> PoppaVic 06:41:35 --- quit: virl (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 07:09:04 --- join: virl (n=blah@vie-213-235-250-143.dsl.sil.at) joined #forth 07:27:20 Quartus: you around? 07:27:41 I ran across what looks like a serious mistake in that proposed ANS cross-compilation wordset 07:27:59 And you're the one who usually straightens me out on issues like that... :) 07:32:56 I'm looking at x.3.1.2 INTERPRETER scope 07:33:39 "Generally speaking, this comprises cross-compiler versions of all defining words and memory allocation and access words." 07:33:58 But it also says that INTERPRETER words are NOT available in COMPILER scope. 07:34:05 Which seems wrong. 07:34:38 heh 07:35:52 For instance, if you define special @ and ! for target addresses, surely you would want those in the compiler words for the target? 07:37:12 tathi: metacompiling is amusing ;-) 07:37:17 Mostly the compiler words just append something to the run-time semantics. 07:37:42 But the standard requires ; to make sure the data space pointer is aligned, so you'd likely want the target ALIGN available in COMPILER scope, if nothing else. 07:37:44 in which context? 07:38:32 Look, it sounds to me like the contexts of (local/meta) are still the issue. 07:38:49 eh, metacompiling isn't particularly difficult 07:39:03 you just have to be a bit careful to keep the host/target contexts separate 07:39:31 I guess the super-issue is the portable-engine that you "metacompile" for. 07:39:40 I just don't understand how that bit of this particular document can be correct. 07:39:56 No idea - never read into ANS 07:40:01 --- join: docl (n=docl@70-101-145-1.br1.mcl.id.frontiernet.net) joined #forth 07:40:14 Though presumably it is, as it's apparently based on stuff that MPE, Ltd, and Forth, Inc had been doing for years. 07:40:22 yeppers 07:40:42 Mostly, shit ends up being translators and filters. 07:41:19 speak in machine code, then you don't need translators 07:41:32 so, the machine understands you better ;-) 07:41:34 with forth, we have the added ! and @ (store/fetch) - which sort of implies building a block/file. 07:41:48 virl: same diff, different context 07:44:49 Somewhere, somehow: you need to have a single context that lets you do windows, GUI, curses, C, asm, drivers, daemons, processes, threads, etc, etc,... 07:45:40 if you do that you something like OOP shit today. 07:46:08 you need something formable 07:49:06 what you want is something like perl/python or ruby all-in-one thing. 07:49:30 nope 07:49:35 Not even remotely 07:50:41 well, then do what you want 07:53:07 hmm...maybe you just don't need very many INTERPRETER words in COMPILER scope, so they figure you'll just define them in the Forth wordlist or something (with different names) and use them both places. 07:53:37 yeah, that's probably it 07:56:05 tathi: it seems, from my dick-around, that every word in a postfix-universe is likely to alter contexts, targets, feeds/reads. 07:56:28 I'm still looking for the "best-fit minimal-set" 07:57:01 no comment 08:01:19 tathi: s'ok - the pain is shared, but you'll admit that someday ;-) 08:02:13 no 08:02:25 someday I'll get off my lazy ass and show you that it can be done without all the pain 08:03:52 I sorta' doubt it. 08:04:17 you may be right :) 08:04:43 though I'm going to spend 4-5 months on a farm where I won't have internet, so maybe I'll get something done 08:05:08 really? A vacation or retreat? 08:05:45 Do you recall the basics of cp/m or DOS programming, tathi? 08:05:45 more a job/internship 08:05:51 cool! 08:06:05 not really -- I've done some DOS/asm programming, but never used cp/m 08:06:21 they used to call stuff "signals", but it was an engine with opcodes/args 08:06:42 huh. no recollection of that 08:07:15 I'm beginning to wonder if a central core/engine and a limited number of ops and structs would suffice to build upon. 08:08:33 bootstrap, call-point, ops, ..... 08:08:47 Not sure, but it seems more and more possible. 08:09:43 Mind you: the bootstrap and call-point+ops would be codified. Extensions may spin off them. 08:10:29 At some point, you get into the parser/lookup/execute - including calling back down. 08:12:29 Remember, please: "the compiler" vs "preprocess/immediate" versus "compile" - and state/mode. 08:13:35 anyway, just thought I'd mention such for you.. We are STILL looking at "a program to.." which can interpret, 'compile' and variants thereof. 08:14:04 stay well, tathi - I think I'll call it a Knight. 08:14:07 --- quit: PoppaVic ("Pulls the pin...") 08:40:27 --- join: nighty (n=nighty@66-163-28-100.ip.tor.radiant.net) joined #forth 08:40:38 hi nighty 08:41:01 hi :) 08:44:10 you come at the right time, where no PoppaVic is here ;-) 09:01:28 back. 09:01:51 humpday; two more work days until the week days are here. 09:28:27 A small question: does anybody know an ultra-super-tiny forth subset interpreter? 09:28:47 how tiny? 09:28:54 eforth could qualify 09:31:07 Well, tiny enough to be embedded into bootloader. But still big enough to be written in C :) 09:31:32 ew 09:31:34 eschew c 09:31:36 :) 09:31:41 http://forthfreak.net/kwiki.cgi?FOeRTHchen 09:31:55 duno that one 09:34:55 if you know the target cpu, eforth is writ to be easy to port. 10:50:08 --- join: saon (i=1000@unaffiliated/saon) joined #forth 10:54:32 THAI. 10:54:41 I mean.. FORTH. 10:54:49 hehe 11:09:48 Hi tathi. I've only just recently looked at the cross-compiler wordset with any focus, so I'm not well-positioned to comment on it. 11:28:54 --- quit: timlarson_ ("Leaving") 11:29:44 I would think you'd just need to temporarily switch scopes to access the required words from another scope. 11:30:32 oh, hmm. 11:30:56 --- join: timlarson_ (n=timlarso@65.116.199.19) joined #forth 11:36:01 --- quit: timlarson_ ("Leaving") 11:36:16 --- join: timlarson_ (n=timlarso@65.116.199.19) joined #forth 11:55:34 Just looked at FOeRTHchen. Bizarre name, bizarrely capitalized. No documentation. A Perl implementation specially crafted to be utterly unreadable. 11:56:01 But it's got a .gif logo, so I guess that makes it ok. 12:03:51 :) 12:05:58 As an exercise in frustration, try using ! and @. 12:06:20 huh? 12:06:57 FOeRTHchen's. Try making a named variable with the words provided. Perhaps there's some way to do it in the documentation. OH WAIT. 12:07:53 oh 12:08:19 Storing and fetching from random values seems to work, but why? How big is dataspace? 12:09:21 The interpreter doesn't accept negative numbers. 12:09:32 I could go on, but I think I've come to the end of this particular piece of string. 12:12:25 oh. I see where I went wrong with the cross-compiling thing. 12:12:40 Oh? 12:13:11 I was thinking that it was intended to allow you to create cross-compilers 12:13:31 If it's just intended to be a standard for implementors to provide cross-compilers, then it all makes sense. 12:14:02 It's a wordset describing a set of standard words to use for creating cross-compilers. 12:14:35 As in, your cross-compiler would have these words, and they would have the semantics described. 12:15:33 right, but it looks like implementations would provide all the CORE words for cross-compiling, in the INTERPRETER and COMPILER scopes 12:15:45 I was thinking it would allow you to define those yourself for whatever target you wanted. 12:16:10 I don't follow. 12:18:04 It looks like they expect that the COMPILER scope would already include words like IF ELSE THEN BEGIN UNTIL and so on. 12:18:28 Why so? 12:18:56 because if you had to define those yourself, you would probably want easy access to the INTERPRETER words 12:19:07 and they don't allow that. 12:19:32 I'm experiencing a PoppaVic-level confusion. 12:19:55 sorry 12:20:10 Heh. :) 12:24:25 If you're saying it's not designed for building a Forth on a target system, I don't see why it couldn't be used that way. I'd expect you'd want to set up target aliases to certain words for ease of cross-over. Have you ever looked at MAF? 12:25:49 I'm not trying to say it couldn't be used for whatever, just that it seems very awkward. 12:26:00 Haven't come up with a concise example yet though 12:26:06 And no, I haven't seen MAF 12:26:57 It's a neat piece of work. 12:30:33 OK, put it this way: if you're writing compiler words for a target system, wouldn't you want HERE , ALLOT etc. to be the ones that work on the target system? 12:30:45 Because that proposal seems to rule out that possibility 12:31:21 HERE ALLOT , etc. are vectored words in the proposal. 12:32:51 yes, in an INTERPRETER definition 12:32:57 So in TARGET scope they work on the target. 12:33:02 right 12:33:15 but what about when writing words in COMPILER scope? 12:33:19 that isn't mentioned at all 12:33:28 which I can see could be just leaving it to the implementation 12:33:55 Can you give an example of where this would be a problem? 12:35:04 ok, what about the traditional IF/THEN, something like: 12:35:24 : IF ['] ?BRANCH , HERE 0 , ; 12:36:13 you would want HERE and , to be the versions that work on the target 12:36:32 Yes. 12:36:33 the ones in the INTERPRETER scope 12:36:51 which that proposal specifically says are not available in COMPILER scope 12:37:17 well, ok, I'm exaggerating 12:37:21 you could put them somewhere else. 12:37:38 They wouldn't need to be in COMPILER scope, unless I misread this. 12:38:01 "The COMPILER scope provides words that may be executed within a target colon definition 12:38:01 (between the : or :NONAME and terminating ; ) to modify the target dictionary being 12:38:01 constructed. Generally speaking, this comprises all flow-of-control structure words (e.g., DO, IF, 12:38:01 etc.), LITERAL, and other words that are immediate in normal Forth usage." 12:38:19 sorry, what wouldn't need to be in COMPILER scope? 12:38:20 --- join: neceve (n=claudiu@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 12:38:31 HERE , ALLOT etc. 12:38:33 --- join: Cuaquero (n=noban@138.Red-81-40-190.staticIP.rima-tde.net) joined #forth 12:38:43 well, no. 12:39:11 But assume that you were constructing your own cross-compiler, so the implementation didn't provide them. 12:39:19 The obvious place to put them would be in INTERPRETER scope 12:39:43 You mean you're constructing a target Forth. And that it doesn't have HERE yet? 12:40:07 yes 12:40:20 oh, never mind, that's highly unlikely 12:40:59 I could see that if you were building from the bedrock up, it's a possibility. 12:41:22 yeah, that's what I'm thinking it doesn't support. 12:41:28 what about COMPILE, for instance 12:41:45 --- quit: Cuaquero () 12:41:50 Well, it does support it. HERE has to be there already for this wordset to work, but your target Forth's HERE is another animal entirely. 12:42:02 no, not the target forth 12:42:28 OK, say you want to cross-compile to an architecture that the cross-compiler doesn't know about 12:42:39 You'll have to unpack that for me. How does that work? 12:43:04 --- join: Cuaquero (n=noban@138.Red-81-40-190.staticIP.rima-tde.net) joined #forth 12:43:04 I would think a cross-compiler would have to be able to generate code for its target architecture(s). 12:43:19 yes. 12:43:32 what I'm saying is, that proposal doesn't allow you to portably extend the cross compiler to new architectures 12:43:33 So, by definition, there is no way to cross-compile to an architecture that the cross-compiler doesn't know about. 12:44:32 it's not a general framework for cross-compiling, it's just a standard for individual cross-compilers 12:44:39 which I didn't realize at first 12:44:41 I'm lost again. 12:45:22 If you mean that this extension doesn't tell you how to build a cross-compiler, then yes. 12:46:06 yeah, basically 12:46:18 None of the Standard Forth wordsets tell you how to implement. 12:46:34 Have you read the paper that comes with that extension? Gives some ideas. 12:47:05 yeah, I read all of it 12:47:16 XCpaper.pdf. 12:47:20 yes 12:48:38 But I still originally thought that it was just defining a set of words that you could build your own cross-compiler on top of. 12:48:52 MAF is an effort to make a portable Forth build, requiring a few base prerequisites in the target system. It doesn't use this wordset, as it predates it, but it's quite an undertaking. 12:48:53 I don't know why 12:49:09 link, to MAF? 12:49:13 yeah, I started looking at it 12:49:16 Oh. Wrong end of the horse, I think. It defines a set of words that a cross-compiler will provide. 12:49:31 yup. that seems obvious now, but I totally missed it at first. 12:50:00 I don't see the issues you're suggesting about it being hard to build a target Forth with it, though. 12:50:04 virl: there's an entry on the forthfreak wiki 12:50:20 ok... ... searching ... 12:50:29 I wasn't trying to suggest that 12:50:31 --- join: OrngeTide (i=orange@orangetide.com) joined #forth 12:50:42 Ah, ok. I must have misunderstood. 12:51:33 that's perfectly understandable :) 12:51:39 :) 12:51:44 virl: http://forthfreak.net/index.cgi?MAF 12:52:10 There's also PAF. 12:55:19 looks like that builds on MAF? 12:55:23 Right. 12:55:57 MAF uses words like tI: to pass source lines to the appropriate place. 12:56:58 I found MAF quite educational back when I was first looking into that sort of thing. 12:59:57 --- quit: Cuaquero () 13:15:28 --- join: juri_ (i=[CCx1MqA@volumehost.com) joined #forth 13:16:16 weee. hi juri 13:16:25 hi OT!@ :) 13:16:35 *working, may be busyish* 13:17:07 *always working. while (concious) do { goto work;} done; 13:17:33 it's getin crowded in heeya 13:17:47 * Quiznos squeeezes in 13:17:56 MOVE! gime a char huh! 13:17:58 heh 13:18:17 juri_ heh, i can optimise that "expr" 13:18:48 begin breathing while eat sleep work again 13:18:51 heh 13:18:58 c makes it a better expr: 13:19:13 while( eat(), sleep(), work()) {; } 13:20:09 optimization is fun. ;) 13:20:14 yep 13:22:12 * juri_ points at gnu gift. :D 13:22:36 which 13:22:42 juri_, ? juri gagari? ;-) 13:22:44 the image recognition app. 13:22:54 virl: nope. julia longtin. ;P 13:23:15 ok ;-) 13:23:41 i'm in the middle of beating my patches into gnu upstream. theres nothing quite as challenging, and rewarding, as doubling the speed of an image recognition tool. 13:24:54 now for increasing its precision... 13:27:50 --- quit: timlarson_ ("Leaving") 13:31:16 --- quit: neceve ("Leaving") 13:49:37 i cant find the entry for pick in the ANS, where is it? 14:02:23 --- quit: virl (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 14:02:34 well? 14:07:13 --- join: LOOP-HOG (n=jason@66.213.202.50) joined #forth 14:09:29 juri_, i'm not sure what forth programmers would do with gnu gift though. :P 14:10:29 no one knows? bah! 14:12:41 Quiznos: 6.2.2030 PICK CORE EXT ? 14:20:08 --- join: slava (n=slava@CPE0080ad77a020-CM000e5cdfda14.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) joined #forth 14:20:15 tat tyvm 14:20:52 found it! 14:21:34 tathi is "nuf?" a core word? 14:27:48 good news. $16M out of place. bad news: not in my account. 14:28:00 * juri_ has a "bad" workday. 14:28:01 heh 14:28:37 I hope that tomorrow is better for you juri 14:28:55 i may not have a work to go to tomorow. ;P 14:29:06 does that mean that you loose your job? 14:29:25 no, it means the buisness closes its doors, and everyone gets sued. 14:29:33 may I ask why? 14:29:49 its a programming error in an ex-employees code. 14:30:02 most unfortunate for you 14:30:10 c++? java? 14:30:14 tathi is "nuf?" a core word? 14:30:24 or anyone else? 14:30:28 not really. my second job will pick it up, and it'll take years for a suit to make it through court... 14:30:55 oh 14:31:20 C. by a C++ programmer that should have his picture on "the daily WTF". 14:31:30 heh 14:31:44 lol 14:31:49 he now sells auto parts. 14:31:58 good for him. he he 14:32:02 bad for you 14:33:14 juri, ever use Forth for anything? 14:33:27 nope. i dont belong here. ;) 14:33:41 odd, then what brings you in here? 14:34:01 orngetide is a longtime friend. looking forward to chatting, when he's not idle. :) 14:34:06 oh 14:34:26 ehheh 14:34:29 i mainly idle 14:34:45 so, get used to having me here. *runs* 14:34:47 23 tons of bombs dropped on hezbollah bunkers 14:34:47 then what does OrngeTide use Forth for, may I ask 14:34:51 oops 14:35:00 hrm. for personal entertainment. 14:35:14 And the Tsumi in Java, bad news these days 14:35:34 i sometimes embed a little forth in my C apps since i often don't want to do the whole thing in C. although c-based forths aren't *real* forths. 14:35:35 a quake in jakarta today 14:35:45 OrngeTide which forth? 14:35:49 i was working on a forth for my arm. 14:35:51 can you share that code? 14:35:51 You mean like MUF? 14:36:03 Quiznos, my own thing. semi-ans 14:36:07 yea. muf is great:) 14:36:13 ok 14:36:16 i need idears 14:36:24 i'm non-ansi 14:36:31 I started to read up on MUF a little bit, any type just goes strait on the paramater stack 14:36:46 my buddy wants me to write a forth for his Apple I clone. but i told him to just use figforth because it already works. 14:36:56 really 14:37:19 i've been using Lua lately because coworkers find forth too scary. Lua is stack based too, but only at the lowest level. 14:37:45 I don't know why buy I find Forth to be nonscary, and everything else to be scary 14:37:46 OrngeTide if they think it's scary then you didnt teach them rightly 14:37:53 i didn't teach them at all. 14:38:02 then fix them 14:38:18 it's not my job to teach people how to program. they are paid six figures, they can figure it out on their own. 14:39:10 tell em `you already know how to write in Forth; it's the same as speaking english somewhat:

14:39:28 someone here wrote a batch file-like language in XML. and used a 12mb xml library to do it. and nobody understands how to use his little language. so there are worse people than me:) 14:39:42 lol ew 14:40:28 yea. i tell them it is simple to do anything simple in forth. some people get it and just kind of copy what is already there to do things. 14:40:28 implement BASIC on top of JAVA and then program unstructured 14:40:40 lol 14:40:47 well Jython/Python is the new BASIC. 14:43:22 well i gotta go. 15:01:50 * juri_ heads home. will find the money tomorow. 15:02:15 how does one determine if there are enough cells on stack for a word to use? 15:02:23 in ANS 15:05:51 depth 15:06:13 oh yea, but what happened to `nuf?'? 15:08:45 : nuf? ( ... n -- f ) depth >= ; 15:09:03 coolies 15:09:07 I've never heard of it before. 15:09:08 tyvm 15:09:11 it's old 15:09:14 i'm 4 15:09:16 heh 15:09:38 sorry, that should be : nuf? depth <= ; 15:10:43 3 nuf? returns f if there are 3 or more cells on stack 15:10:46 so >= 15:10:54 a f 15:10:57 a tf 15:12:18 no, it should be : nuf? depth <= ; 15:13:35 ok 15:13:35 ty 15:13:40 i will ck your work :) 15:13:43 heh 15:38:04 --- join: I440r (n=mark4@24-177-235-246.dhcp.gnvl.sc.charter.com) joined #forth 15:38:31 i added a very nice command line history to isforth :) 15:38:35 gona do a release now 15:38:44 hi I440r 15:38:47 it doesnt store duplicates 15:38:49 hi :) 15:39:29