00:00:00 --- log: started forth/06.10.03 00:17:58 --- quit: arke (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 01:08:46 --- join: Cheery (n=Cheery@a81-197-19-23.elisa-laajakaista.fi) joined #forth 01:15:20 Quartus: Can I see your linked list implementation, please? 01:55:42 --- quit: Raystm2 (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 01:55:49 --- join: Raystm2 (n=NanRay@adsl-69-149-58-83.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth 02:03:48 --- quit: madgarden (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 02:10:06 --- quit: nighty_ (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 02:10:42 --- join: nighty_ (n=nighty@216.237.248.79) joined #forth 02:22:58 --- quit: Quartus (Read error: 113 (No route to host)) 02:24:11 --- join: Rocky (n=trailer@CPE0001023f6e4f-CM013349902843.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) joined #forth 02:24:50 --- nick: Rocky -> Quartus 02:25:26 --- mode: ChanServ set +o Quartus 02:27:30 larsb: http://forth.pastebin.ca/186266 02:28:04 Thanks. 02:28:20 Since then I redefined add-node to take its parameters in the opposite order. 02:38:56 --- quit: Cheery (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 02:39:00 --- join: Cheer1 (n=Cheery@a81-197-19-23.elisa-laajakaista.fi) joined #forth 02:39:20 --- nick: Cheer1 -> Cheery 02:57:25 larsb, I also redefined linked-list to be : linked list here nil , ; 02:57:42 I shall have to post an update at some juncture. 03:12:06 --- nick: crest_ -> Crest 03:32:55 --- nick: arke_ -> arke 03:40:00 --- quit: TreyB (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 04:12:14 Isn't it possible to attach an annotation or comment to the original? 04:13:06 I think modifying a post just creates a new post. 04:17:13 I sent the pastebin admins a comment suggesting annotations would be useful. 04:17:46 well, it's just a scratchpad for discussion. If I publish something finished, I won't do it there. 04:19:09 Sure, but sometimes it's nice to scribble some more in the scratchpad. 04:19:35 Hmm, there is a "comment on this post" link, but it doesn't seem to work (in a way I understand). 04:20:15 I've never tried it. 04:20:57 Never mind. Nice list implementation, though. 04:21:54 Thanks. It's handy. 04:22:45 --- join: TreyB (n=trey@cpe-66-87-192-27.tx.sprintbbd.net) joined #forth 04:27:53 After seeing some good-looking Forth code recently, I think I'll have to go back and revise my own toy Forth. I've come to realise that some of the word definitions are quite horrible. 04:28:22 It's definitely a skill that improves with practice. 04:37:36 If only I had a Forth (or other interesting non-mainstream language) day job. 04:37:53 That'd drain the joy out of it for sure. :) 04:41:55 Yeah, maybe. 04:42:37 But the first few months would be great. :) 04:42:43 heh. 04:43:38 And then I wouldn't have to be ashamed of putting "Forth" in my CV. 04:44:08 You're ashamed to put programming language experience on your resume? 04:44:59 Well yes, if I feel I'm actually not a good programmer in that language. 04:45:09 Oh, I see. :) 05:02:35 --- mode: ChanServ set +o arke 05:41:30 * Crest is away: … 05:50:56 --- join: vatic (n=chatzill@ool-45740b1c.dyn.optonline.net) joined #forth 06:01:30 Quartus: are you going to collect your list processing snippets into a single file? I haven't been following the bin and have just 2 of them. Perhaps that's all there is? 06:01:59 I think there's just been the two. I didn't anticipate this much interest :) I'll have to publish a consolidated version. 06:04:46 Quartus: I've just got similar (I think) code from Townsend and Feucht's "Personal Expert Systems" 06:05:03 Pete Townsend writes Forth, eh? 06:07:59 Quartus: Pete's brother Carl. Take my word for it; you wouldn't want to work with Pete. (Although he uses a chording keyboard...) 06:08:14 heh 06:10:14 Quartus: you don't know the book? 06:10:38 No, don't think it's one I've heard of. 06:13:25 Quartus: no matter. I was reading Odette's JFAR papers on Prolog in Forth and it was a citation. $1.35 plus postage. Toy Lisp and Prolog in Forth... 06:13:40 I'll type the code in and post it sometime soon... 06:14:01 Ok. Might be interesting. As you can see from my snippets, it's pretty easy to implement lists in Forth. 06:15:48 --- join: Ray_work (n=Raystm2@199.227.227.26) joined #forth 06:19:35 Quartus: I think a comparison with your code would be instructive... 06:20:09 Perhaps. Mine is only a quick doodle; I'll be sprucing it up a little. 06:20:55 How about a garbage collector? That's good to have in Lisp. 06:21:33 I have never had need of gc in Forth. Lisp may benefit more from it. 06:22:02 Yes, that was re: Lisp in Forth. 06:22:39 Well... the linked-implementation is only that, a linked-list implementation. Many miles away from Lisp. 06:31:13 Lisp is strongly-typed; Forth is untyped, so there's not a lot of common ground. A collision between the two means either making a typed Forth (which is a very different thing from standard Forth), or perhaps an untyped Lisp. 06:32:21 I'm not sure either one is a win. 06:34:21 If the goal is "a Lisp implemented in Forth", a third option would be to use Forth as an invisible implementation language for the Lisp runtime. 06:35:15 I suppose. I've never built a Lisp, I don't know if writing it in Forth would help. 06:35:29 Not really. 06:36:03 I don't have any desire to build a Lisp in Forth; the linked-list implementation isn't a move in that direction. 06:36:20 I understand (and applaude) that. :) 06:37:03 CL is hardly an easy goal, at any rate; it's large and considerably complex, as compared to Forth. 06:38:12 Agreed. I have my own 90% of a CL, written in Emacs Lisp. 06:38:39 Building from the ground up, it looks like a long row to hoe. 06:39:04 Yes, a 100% CL isn't exactly something you do for fun. 06:39:30 Whereas a Standard Forth is something one person can write in a relatively short time. 06:39:44 I also have 90% of an ANS Forth. :) 06:40:02 Most people stop at 80 or 90%. Skipping the hard bits. :) 06:40:22 That's where the pain starts. 06:40:42 Or they've coded themselves into a corner somehow. 06:41:50 Quartus: ah, yes... 06:53:41 i'm thinken about writing my own forth system at the moment to learn more about the internals of forth 06:54:18 If your goal is to learn to write Forth, I would discourage you from trying to do so by writing a Forth compiler. They're really very different things. 06:54:34 of course 06:55:20 i already learned the basics and now im interessed in understanding how a forth system works internaly 06:55:24 Also, coming to Forth via a compiler implementation tends to encourage the compiler writer to think that all Forths work internally the way his own does, and that can limit further learning of Forth itself. 06:55:37 ^^ 06:56:03 i know that their are dozends of ways to implement forth 06:58:00 If it's learning the internals you want, you'd be well-served to study a complete implementation designed for instruction, such as Minimal ANS Forth (MAF). It's a Forth written in Forth. 06:59:05 thx 06:59:42 MAF and PAF are both in this directory: ftp://ftp.taygeta.com/pub/Forth/Applications/ANS/ 07:00:31 The benefit is that the hard parts are already in there, so you can see how it all fits together. 07:00:34 Crest: As a beginner, I would very much second Quartus' recommendation of MAF, which he tipped me to... 07:03:27 You'll learn far more about the internals of a real Forth compiler from that than you will trying to build a Forth of your own. 07:07:47 --- join: virl (n=virl@chello062178085149.1.12.vie.surfer.at) joined #forth 07:10:52 --- quit: snowrichard ("Leaving") 07:25:00 --- join: zpg (n=user@user-544481c1.lns5-c10.dsl.pol.co.uk) joined #forth 07:32:22 --- nick: Raystm2 -> nanstm 07:49:10 --- join: snowrichard (n=richard@12.18.108.162) joined #forth 07:49:27 hi 07:50:52 --- quit: I440r (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 07:59:31 --- join: I440r (n=mark4__@12.197.217.242) joined #forth 08:01:34 hi snowrichard 08:01:44 hi snowrichard, Quartus 08:01:51 Hey. 08:01:52 i'm intruiged by do...loop not needing a limit. 08:02:03 What do you mean? 08:02:19 i would have thought i'd get a stack error when calling : gogogo 0 do ." hi" cr loop ; 08:02:26 but it just indefinitely prints "hi" 08:02:26 phone 08:02:38 You should. It must be finding a 0 somewhere below the top of stack. That's not a feature. 08:02:38 obviously '10 gogogo' works fine. 08:02:45 odd 08:02:54 nope, indefinite. 08:03:00 on the Palm I had to reset. 08:03:04 i'm testing in gforth too. 08:03:20 A 0 0 do ... loop will run 65535 times on the Palm. On Gforth it'll run 2^32-1 times. 08:03:23 so 'gogogo' just prints "hi" until I hit Control-C 08:03:31 Not indefinite, though. 08:03:34 oh ok. 08:03:52 do definitely needs a limit. 08:03:54 but I was surprised that do wasn't checking the stack, finding it empty and flagging an error since it couldn't retrieve it's limit. 08:04:21 Stack-underflow checking isn't done with each stack access, not in Quartus Forth and not in Gforth, at any rate. It's checked when the console comes back around to ask for input. 08:05:14 oh, so i see. 08:05:18 this occurs with +, too. 08:05:38 You can underflow the stack in either implementation (and many others) to at least a limited degree. You won't necessarily get zeroes from down there, though. Could be anything. 08:05:39 an empty stack, then '4 +' is 'ok', but printing the top of the stack results in an underflow error. 08:06:16 so ought one check in a word that calls do...loop to see whether we can get data from the stack? 08:06:21 rather than seeing a stream of "hi"/ 08:06:29 (btw - have to dash in 2 mins, just got a call in the midst of this.) 08:06:48 ?do will check to ensure that the limit and the start are not equal, but if you want to check depth, you'd have to do it explicitly. ENOUGH? is a common word for this. 08:07:12 ok, neat 08:07:28 enough? isn't in gforth it seems. 08:07:32 but more later, gotta dart. 08:07:40 No, it's not. It's trivial to write it 08:07:44 ah ok 08:07:53 General practice is not to check stack depth everywhere. 08:07:54 i'll give this some time in an hour or two 08:08:09 thanks again, talk in a bit. must head out now. 08:08:11 ok. 08:09:30 --- quit: snowrichard ("Leaving") 08:11:37 --- quit: Quiznos (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 08:24:49 --- quit: vatic ("Chatzilla 0.9.74 [Firefox 1.5.0.7/2006090921]") 08:43:58 puh.. there is a way to write java in a convenient way, I can't believe it. 08:44:56 but it's so. 08:45:24 I'm not clear. I expect you to be hating Java. Are you saying there's something you don't hate? 08:47:19 yeah.. and why are you again in a defensive mood? 08:47:43 Defensive? I'm not defending anything. Yesterday you hated Java. What changed? 08:51:42 yesterday? I don't remember that I said I hate it, I remember only that I said that .net is java on steroids. 08:53:07 yesterday -- "java is a pita". Day before "java suX". 08:54:34 Last month -- "Java's developers should die a long slow death." 08:54:58 So you can see why I'd be surprised to hear you say you like it now. 08:56:40 well.. liking it... 08:57:38 I found a way to use it in a way where I can say it doesn't hurt me. 09:04:41 So you still want the developers to die, only now you'd have them die a shorter, faster death? 09:11:25 --- join: zpg` (n=user@soup.linux.pwf.cam.ac.uk) joined #forth 09:17:45 heh... ah.. whatever when you want it to see that way fine 09:18:04 Your words, pal, wishing somebody dead because you don't like their computer language. 09:19:31 sounds serious. hi guys. 09:19:37 Hi zpg 09:23:37 --- join: neceve (n=claudiu@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 09:23:40 hi Quartus 09:28:34 ok, so i'm on a linux box with no compile facilities. recommendations for a forth linux binary to download? 09:28:58 I think there's a Gforth 0.6.2 binary for linux. Have to check on that. 09:29:23 You can almost always find a gforth package for a particular distro. 09:29:25 what about all these {p,k,retro}s 09:29:38 or is gforth still the best bet? 09:30:18 Gforth is a standard forth. Retroforth is almost standard, with my ANS layer loaded on top of it, but gforth is still faster. pForth doesn't ship with a linux binary, as far as I know. 09:30:28 ok 09:30:43 i just remembered i might have put gforth on this system a while back, so find's busy running. 09:31:03 slocate 09:31:06 kforth, isforth and gforth or seem to be here 09:31:11 *all seem 09:31:30 You've got it covered, then. 09:31:30 http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/gforth/ 09:33:05 now /that's/ interesting. remember, Quartus, i mentioned fiddling with looping earlier, and even if nothing was on the stack, my simple : gogo 0 do ." hi" cr loop ; function seemed to go on and on and on.... well on this box, running gforth, i get an immediate stack underflow error. 09:33:29 On some systems Gforth puts a fence under the stack, so it raises an exception. 09:34:07 intriguing. i hadn't expected operation to differ between darwin and linux. 09:34:14 That's a cost-free way to check for under/overflow, where it's available. 09:50:57 it's so easy to be get wrong when participants are shallowbrained 09:51:29 zpg, how about retroforth? 09:52:12 virl: is it worth trying? i've got gforth running now. 09:52:21 open to suggestions of course. 09:56:41 imho, retroforth is nicer. 09:57:47 ok, looking 09:58:53 but that's my 'hater' opinion 09:59:13 'hater' of what? 10:01:17 * virl is only tiffing 10:04:21 hater of all.. of everything blah.. but I'm not that label some guys put on me. 10:04:34 retroforth is a small non-standard forth. It lacks a lot of error checking, which I think as a newcomer you want to have. 10:05:39 or not.. some newcomers like the lack of complexity 10:07:10 it seems pretty clean, though do didn't seem to be defined. 10:07:21 extensions/ans-compat recitifed that of course. 10:07:36 retro works fine here, but i believe it won't run on PPC hardware. 10:08:06 It's missing a bunch of control structure words, by design. It doesn't halt on typos, by itself, doesn't check for underflow/overflow, etc. Even as an experienced Forth coder, I find the lack of error checking annoying. 10:08:14 It's x86-only. 10:08:23 * zpg` nods 10:09:04 My standard layer adds a lot of that back in. Compiler security, a .S that can tell you whether the stack is empty or not, standard exception messages, etc. 10:12:00 yeah, i noticed a few conventions re-appearing. 10:12:27 The layer also reverses some of the retroforth-only names for some words. 10:12:42 --- join: vatic (n=chatzill@pool-162-84-156-148.ny5030.east.verizon.net) joined #forth 10:13:06 looks like you think retro is bad in the way it is 10:14:16 I find the arbitrary renaming of words adds nothing but confusion, but otherwise retro is fine for what it is; I find it too minimal for my needs, however, and have no particular desire to learn new names for Forth words that have already got established names. Hence the layer. 10:14:51 sound sensible. 10:15:13 better head i guess, it's been interesting. 10:15:16 cheers for now 10:15:17 --- quit: zpg` ("ERC Version 5.0.4 $Revision: 1.726.2.19 $ (IRC client for Emacs)") 10:15:23 I find else a handy word, for example, and do/loop, and recurse; I prefer the standard method of being able to define a word in terms of a previous definition by the same name, which you can't do easily in retro by itself. 10:16:20 If I thought retro was bad, I wouldn't have spent any time writing a Standard layer for it. 10:37:59 you only want to write for everything a standard layer 10:38:01 --- join: esterkid (n=esterkid@208-39-164-123.isp.comcastbusiness.net) joined #forth 10:38:50 Oh, is that the only thing I want to do, virl? What makes you think you know what I want to do? 10:52:10 --- quit: zpg (Read error: 113 (No route to host)) 11:08:20 Hi all- typed up the "List processing in F83" code from that famous tome by Townsend and Feucht: "Designing Personal Expert Systems." 11:08:33 If you find it frustrating, please don't blame me! 11:08:43 I blame you! oh, sorry. 11:08:48 where is it? 11:09:01 Oops! pastebin.ca... 11:09:19 ah, found it. 11:09:31 Gonna see if I can get it to work now... 11:10:43 Hmm. Looks like those are 'lists', but not linked-lists. Arrays. 11:12:40 I should have a stare at your code aussi... 11:12:51 It's fun to look over that code; there are a few spots that make it very implementation-specific and non-portable. The 2* before allot, the whole ?create word, the assumption that variables are built with create, the implementation of recurse. 11:13:34 Quartus: yes, even for a beginner, renaming RECURSE seems not too cool... 11:13:47 vatic, I don't believe F83 had RECURSE. I'd have to check. 11:14:20 the implementation as shown in your source there is married to a specific implementation. 11:14:52 RECURSE isn't in Derick & Baker... 11:15:19 hmm, seems like it was a 'controlled reference word' in f83. 11:16:05 Quartus: that I see in Kelly & Spies... 11:16:35 I'm looking at the so-called Forth-83 Standard doc. 11:16:55 I'm sure your library is VAST! 11:16:59 heh 11:17:19 ...or VASTLY BIGGER than mine. ;-) 11:19:34 Quartus, simply your lordly behaviour to other thoughts than yours... every forths should be standardized, a standard is the only thing which makes sense to you. 11:19:40 --- join: Quiznos (i=1000@unaffiliated/quiznos) joined #forth 11:25:31 That must have been for some f83 system that didn't already have recurse. 11:26:23 Definitely not a linked-list implementation, so it won't be too useful to compare against the one I did. 11:27:01 Quartus: it's pretty specific in that it includes Townsend's LAST. 11:27:23 Quartus: is this your most recent definition? : add-node ( node list -- ) tuck @ swap cons swap ! ; 11:27:25 LAST is an f83 word, actually. 11:27:33 vatic, yes, that's the latest. 11:28:15 Quartus: Oh, I see. What with all the FIRST business, I was thinking FIRST/LAST and not FIRST/TAIL... 11:28:59 This code is quite a different animal -- no car/cdr, because there's no cdr. 11:30:35 You can walk the list by incrementing through the array. It's not particularly flexible, in that you have to pre-allot the space for each list, and I'm not too impressed with the implementation. 11:31:04 They suggest that FIRST/TAIL is CAR/CDR... 11:31:27 returning a pointer to those parts of a list... 11:32:24 Yes, I suppose they are in the broader sense. Their CONS doesn't lay down a pair, though, so there isn't a left-hand and right-hand part; no way to address a cons by itself, only in the context of a list. 11:35:34 Quartus: They're relying on the dictionary for part of the data structure, no? 11:37:08 yeah, some oddities going on with atom? and and ?create. Looks like they differentiate the 'type' of a list entry by whether the value is the pfa of a defined word. 11:37:25 It's a curious bit of code, somewhat far removed from a general-purpose lists routine. 11:39:07 and the 'readl' word is forward parsing! 11:39:12 Quite arcane. 11:39:30 Quartus: not to defend their implementation, but the book moves on to simple Prolog unification and backtracking, so perhaps the linked list built on top of the dictionary structure simplifies their (future) code... 11:39:53 I don't know. You can backtrack, even in f83, without mucking about in the dictionary. 11:40:35 I'm sure it met the needs of the text, which was what it was intended for. 11:40:41 Well, that's beyond me for now... 11:40:58 (the backtracking, that is...) 11:41:30 Their lists can hold two things -- the address of a named variable, or the address of a named list. 11:42:53 If I'm reading it right. It's hard to say. That case statement in readl is bizarrely formatted. 11:43:32 As I say, I'm sure it served as for the purposes of illustrating the language concepts. 11:45:51 Quartus: you're defining NIL as zero in your list code? 11:46:09 Yes. 11:46:51 nil 0 constant 11:46:57 0 constant nil 11:47:11 Oops! :-( 11:50:47 Quartus: your copy-list reverses list order? 11:51:17 it does, walking forward through one list, copying successive elements to the head of the other list, so that causes a reversal. 11:51:59 Just wanted to make sure that wasn't another Oops! 11:52:32 nope, it's supposed to do that. I was only answering zpg's request for such a routine; if you wanted to build the Wonderful World of Lists, you'd write reverse, as well, etc. 11:53:05 Ah! wasn't in on that part of the conversation... 11:53:32 And copy-list could recurse down to the end of the first list, and then add all the items in reverse to the second list, so they came out identically. It's pretty simple stuff when you get going. 11:53:58 zpg is coming from lisp, so he keeps asking list questions. 12:03:45 Quartus: wow, you're right about atom?. It gets the dictionary name of a DFA and tests if it's NIL? 12:04:29 yes. 12:05:35 I'm not in front of the source atm (mobile). 12:06:16 Quartus_: it's hardly important. :-) You've been very generous with your insights already. 12:07:28 --- join: snoopy_1711 (i=snoopy_1@dslb-084-058-185-051.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #forth 12:07:40 I have spent considerable time considering generality and portability, lately, so some of the quirks stand out prominently. 12:07:56 --- quit: Snoopy42 (Nick collision from services.) 12:07:58 --- nick: snoopy_1711 -> Snoopy42 12:16:37 --- join: zpg (n=user@user-544481c1.lns5-c10.dsl.pol.co.uk) joined #forth 12:30:13 Quartus: Couldn't you say : atom? @ nil @ = ; instead of : atom? body> @ ['] nil @ = ; 12:30:27 ? variable nil nil nil ! 12:31:32 sorry... 12:31:34 ? 12:31:44 variable nil nil nil ! 12:33:25 vatic, maybe. Can't see the code. :) 12:33:33 OK... 12:34:19 hi guys 12:34:23 vatic: what is atom? testing? 12:35:42 NIL is a variable that contains its own address, so atom? asks if a variable also conatins the address of NIL, from what I can tell... 12:36:23 so 'is this variable nil'? 12:37:14 zpg: I think it's more like does it point to NIL as well... 12:37:36 I mean "does it point to NIL"? 12:37:38 but what does 'nil' mean in terms of how it's used? 12:37:46 i.e. conceptually. 12:38:04 zpg: the empty list. 12:38:21 zpg: http://forth.pastebin.ca/190075 12:40:14 ah ok, more list stuff 13:10:01 --- join: Azure_Ag (i=azure@azure.ath.cx) joined #forth 13:21:04 Anyone have an idea what the word (SOURCE) means? 13:34:49 --- quit: Cheery ("Download Gaim: http://gaim.sourceforge.net/") 13:37:21 --- quit: neceve ("Leaving") 13:42:19 --- quit: Azure_Ag ("Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-POP!") 13:50:01 source returns ( c-addr u ), the input buffer as a string. 13:55:35 Quartus: this is what's puzzling me: "else drop ['] source >body @ ['] (source) =". What's (source)? 13:56:21 no clue. Some implementation-specific thing is my guess. 13:58:56 Quartus: Thanks. pForth was pretty happy with the code except for that. I guess I'll try to rewrite the parser... 14:11:00 --- quit: Quartus_ (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 14:11:49 --- join: Quartus_ (n=Quartus_@209.167.5.1) joined #forth 14:11:49 --- mode: ChanServ set +o Quartus_ 14:23:18 --- quit: esterkid (" HydraIRC -> http://www.hydrairc.com <- IRC has never been so good") 14:33:12 vatic: you might get some clues with "see (source)" or possibly "view (source)" 14:34:13 JasonWoof: thanks, but it's referred to in a book, and not in my system... :-) 14:37:51 heh 14:41:26 --- quit: virl (Remote closed the connection) 15:02:51 --- join: madgarden (n=madgarde@Kitchener-HSE-ppp3577114.sympatico.ca) joined #forth 15:04:26 --- quit: Ray_work ("User pushed the X - because it's Xtra, baby") 15:25:58 --- quit: TreyB (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 15:25:58 --- join: TreyB_ (n=trey@cpe-66-87-192-27.tx.sprintbbd.net) joined #forth 15:36:19 --- join: TreyB (n=trey@cpe-66-87-192-27.tx.sprintbbd.net) joined #forth 15:36:19 --- quit: TreyB_ (Read error: 131 (Connection reset by peer)) 15:37:17 --- join: snowrichard (n=richard@12.18.108.162) joined #forth 15:50:57 --- join: TreyB_ (n=trey@cpe-66-87-192-27.tx.sprintbbd.net) joined #forth 15:51:03 --- quit: TreyB (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 15:54:33 --- quit: madgarden (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 15:55:16 --- join: madgarden (n=madgarde@Kitchener-HSE-ppp3577114.sympatico.ca) joined #forth 16:11:44 --- quit: TreyB_ (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 16:22:23 --- join: TreyB (n=trey@cpe-66-87-192-27.tx.sprintbbd.net) joined #forth 16:32:37 Hey. 17:51:24 Hi. 17:51:49 What's up? 17:52:04 Not too much, been for a stroll and a beer. Been pondering some Papert. 17:52:22 Papert Owels? 17:52:51 Seymour Papert. 17:52:59 Seymour Papert Owels? 17:53:03 --- join: aum (n=aum@60-234-243-247.bitstream.orcon.net.nz) joined #forth 17:53:05 Educational Theorist, Mathematician. Desgiend Logo. 17:53:10 *Designed, even 17:54:09 heh 17:54:31 Seymour Butts, by the bleachers. 17:56:06 I remember Papert. He predicted massive changes in education due to computers. I don't think it happened. 17:56:51 No. The interesting things rarely do. 17:57:18 I had much to do with Logo at one stage, even working with the remote turtles that drew on big sheets of paper. 17:57:20 Papert. 17:59:22 Quite. 17:59:35 I'm pretty intriguied by Kay, Papert, Engelbart really. 17:59:49 Generally via the Smalltalk paradigm I came across these figures. 18:01:01 I have the same feelings about Kay, Engelbart, Minsky, et al. Made a great noise about how they had the tail of the future clenched between their massive frontal lobes, but when it failed to transpire, they kind of faded into the background. 18:02:06 Smalltalk didn't set the world on fire, either. 18:02:38 No, but it did me. 18:02:57 To be frank, one observes a lot of its ideas being gradually filtered into modern systems and languages. 18:04:44 hehe logo 18:05:42 hmm. 18:06:20 * fission installs lang/ubclogo 18:06:24 er ucb 18:11:14 There's also kturtle, if you're a KDE person. 18:12:38 i never really used logo that much, but the project goals and paperts reports on usage are pretty interesting. 18:12:52 also, if you're an engelbart person, they're trying to capture some of the nls/augment stuff on: 18:13:18 http://hyperscope.org/ 18:14:33 wow that fun lasted all of 3 minutes 18:14:33 heh 18:17:39 so it goes. 18:20:04 anyone here got any thoughts on 4tH? 18:20:20 Bezemer's target compiler? 18:21:02 --- quit: fission ("foo") 18:21:43 yes. 18:25:14 I don't know; I don't have much use for non-interactive Forth-like systems. 18:27:14 ok. 18:34:59 --- join: crest_ (n=crest@p54895BAE.dip.t-dialin.net) joined #forth 18:44:30 --- quit: Crest (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 18:54:50 --- quit: zpg ("ERC Version 5.1.3 (IRC client for Emacs)") 19:12:23 --- quit: madgarden (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 19:18:42 --- quit: nanstm ("Should have paid the bill.") 19:26:36 --- quit: vatic (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 19:30:28 --- join: madgarden (n=madgarde@Kitchener-HSE-ppp3577114.sympatico.ca) joined #forth 19:35:05 --- quit: JasonWoof (kornbluth.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 19:35:05 --- quit: larsb (kornbluth.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 19:35:05 --- quit: Zymurgy (kornbluth.freenode.net irc.freenode.net) 19:35:22 --- join: JasonWoof (n=jason@unaffiliated/herkamire) joined #forth 19:35:22 --- join: larsb (i=lars@1-1-14-10a.kt.gbg.bostream.se) joined #forth 19:35:22 --- join: Zymurgy (i=zymurgy@cat.delfax.net) joined #forth 19:35:22 --- mode: irc.freenode.net set +o JasonWoof 19:45:40 hey jasonwoof 19:57:21 --- quit: TreyB (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 20:26:32 --- quit: I440r (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 20:34:44 --- join: TreyB (n=trey@cpe-66-87-192-27.tx.sprintbbd.net) joined #forth 20:52:14 --- quit: aum ("Leaving") 23:20:20 --- quit: crest_ (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 23:26:55 --- join: crest_ (n=crest@p54895BAE.dip.t-dialin.net) joined #forth 23:39:26 hey Quartus_ :) 23:59:27 --- join: arke_ (n=Chris@pD9E079E0.dip.t-dialin.net) joined #forth 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/06.10.03