00:00:00 --- log: started forth/11.03.26 01:17:33 --- join: nixness (~dsc@SMSADLER.WV.QATAR.CMU.EDU) joined #forth 01:37:18 --- quit: gogonkt (Read error: Operation timed out) 01:40:19 --- join: gogonkt (~gogonkt@2001:c08:3700:ffff::1:61b) joined #forth 01:51:45 --- join: qFox (~C00K13S@5356B263.cm-6-7c.dynamic.ziggo.nl) joined #forth 02:06:52 --- join: martin_hex (~mjc@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk) joined #forth 02:06:53 --- quit: martinhex (Disconnected by services) 02:06:55 --- nick: martin_hex -> martinhex 02:13:01 --- quit: gogonkt (*.net *.split) 02:13:01 --- quit: fantazo__ (*.net *.split) 02:17:10 --- join: gogonkt (~gogonkt@2001:c08:3700:ffff::1:61b) joined #forth 02:20:43 --- join: fantazo__ (~fantazo@178-191-163-104.adsl.highway.telekom.at) joined #forth 02:48:28 --- join: tathi (~josh@dsl-216-227-95-5.fairpoint.net) joined #forth 03:26:39 --- quit: fantazo__ (Remote host closed the connection) 03:47:35 --- quit: nixness (Remote host closed the connection) 06:28:54 --- quit: ygrek (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 06:41:59 --- join: ygrek (debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/ygrek) joined #forth 07:14:16 --- join: SunTzu (1000@c-68-56-234-19.hsd1.fl.comcast.net) joined #forth 07:15:22 hex $deadface 1s 03r3h 07:16:40 well? 07:20:22 "forced" ... 07:20:24 hihihi 07:20:24 funny 07:20:37 i can imagine someone pointing a gun at ASau` nostril... 07:23:08 IIRC he had submitted a bunch of patches which the maintainer rejected because they weren't K&R C or something silly like that. 07:24:56 Or he wasn't positive that they wouldn't break on some quirky C compilers that he doesn't know anyone who has actually used them in the last decade, so he couldn't check. 07:26:37 But yeah, I suppose "forced" is a little strong. 07:31:28 so he supplied patches that might break shit, and the maintainer wasn't concinvces. 07:31:30 convinced. 07:31:33 right, sounds like he was forced 07:31:51 i am guessing the maintainer started beating him with the K&R book 07:33:14 i wonder ... 07:35:04 why... oh i wonder how.. 07:35:10 odd technology is funny 07:35:16 but anyway, that was a good reason to reject the patches. 07:37:21 tathi: you got a link to the discussion and patch? 07:38:51 ams: https://groups.google.com/group/pforthdev/browse_frm/thread/c3dee452fe5fc8e1 07:39:28 ams: also https://groups.google.com/group/pforthdev/browse_frm/thread/ae9c4f47d6ba8b3 07:39:56 thank you kindly 07:40:19 * crc returns to working on retro 07:41:33 well, he lied, ASau`... 07:41:36 multiple times. 07:41:47 the patch was not rejected. 07:42:24 nor was the reason that some obscure compilers do not support isspace. 07:43:34 a better patch would do a configure check for isspace and see if it behaves correctly 07:43:38 that's not about compilers; isspace() is about libc 07:43:43 which is not Forth. 07:43:49 if so, use that, otherwise, use its own one 07:44:18 SunTzu: c compiler and c library are defined by a single standard, you cannot implement a c compiler without supporting the rest of the library 07:44:23 SunTzu: they are effectivley the same 07:45:09 ASau' answer was also a non-answer 07:45:26 Phil asked which compilers do not support it, ASau` only cites a standard. 07:45:34 there are several C standards, for compilers and libc 07:45:40 SunTzu: no 07:45:46 SunTzu: there is exactly _one_ standard for C 07:45:58 posix & SuS are not the same in content. 07:46:07 that's two, there are others 07:46:19 SunTzu: POSIX does not standarise C 07:46:33 SunTzu: not to mention that if in conflict, ISO C takes precedenes over anything in POSIX 07:46:46 the only standard for C is ISO C 07:46:57 and well, ANSI C.. but that is ISO too... so 07:47:26 also, POSIX doesn't define the C language, it only defines a extended library for C 07:47:38 including a UNIX like environment 07:47:51 with things like c89 behaving in a specific manner and such 07:49:16 now, ASau` could have had a better answer with: No, I don't know of any C compiler that doesn't support isspace. 07:49:17 :-) 07:49:28 (cause well, i don't know of any such compiler) 07:49:50 it would be important to set the locale though so that it behaves properly 07:50:44 (there are a bunch of compilers who have had a buggy isspace though!) 07:56:41 --- join: Monevii (~Monevii@67.224.134.158) joined #forth 08:09:06 --- join: malyn_ (~malyn@unaffiliated/malyn) joined #forth 08:09:38 --- quit: gogonkt (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 08:10:04 --- quit: malyn (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 08:10:10 --- join: gogonkt (~gogonkt@2001:c08:3700:ffff::2:e23) joined #forth 08:11:02 --- nick: malyn_ -> malyn 08:54:34 --- join: forther (~forther@c-71-202-145-159.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) joined #forth 09:04:55 --- join: davazp (~user@201.Red-88-6-204.staticIP.rima-tde.net) joined #forth 09:13:23 OK, fair enough; I've had enough bad experiences with people who maintain Forth systems that I didn't bother checking the details. 09:15:54 fair enough that as well 09:16:20 i just know that ASau` often tends to ... overblow things a bit 09:16:25 Yup. 09:18:17 hi, I have a question about gforth.. can I use the C interface to access to C variables? the documentation tells about functions only. Thanks in advance 09:18:35 davazp: tried asking on the list? 09:19:28 the 0.7.0 interface only does function-like things. 09:20:04 You can hack around it by doing `\c #define foo() variable` and then interfacing to that. 09:20:27 tathi: thanks! I am going to try it 09:21:07 Or something like that. It has been a while since I played with it. 10:14:36 crc: not everything happend on mailing list. 10:17:27 davazp: there's a FFI hack: 10:17:28 ' noop ' noop rettype (addr) 10:17:49 davazp: then you can access variables. 10:18:12 Of course, you can't use this hack reliably, 10:18:26 since gforth FFI isn't reliable at all. 10:18:30 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 10:19:35 --- quit: forther (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.) 10:26:45 --- quit: MayDaniel (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 10:39:43 --- join: roarde (~roarde@pdpc/supporter/active/roarde) joined #forth 10:50:47 --- quit: davazp (Remote host closed the connection) 10:54:27 --- quit: roarde (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 11:12:04 --- join: roarde (~roarde@pdpc/supporter/active/roarde) joined #forth 11:23:11 --- join: impomatic (~chatzilla@87.115.118.174) joined #forth 11:32:42 Is there an outer forth interpreter written only using standard ANSI words that doesn't look untidy? Mine is ugly :-( http://twitcode.org/show/257/forth-outer-interpreter-version-2 11:35:00 impomatic: better to factor out refill and source, don't use accept and tib #tib directly... 11:35:28 Thanks, I'll try that. 11:36:02 Oh, damn. 11:36:09 heh 11:37:01 * ASau` wonders if [censored] forth lovers ever tried following their own advices at all. 11:37:14 --- quit: nighty^ (Read error: Operation timed out) 11:37:55 impomatic: first, "accept" is wrong way at all. 11:38:07 "accept" doesn't follow source input rules. 11:38:40 Basically, you force teletype source input. 11:39:36 Second, it violates compilation rules. 11:39:53 You compile with "," while it should be "compile," at the very least. 11:40:15 impomatic: I have used this (uses some non-standard things): http://pastebin.com/FGJtfvaU 11:40:19 Third, "literal" is immediate. 11:42:36 Thanks, I'll fix all those. At the moment it just about works and is under 1K 11:43:31 Smells like premature optimization. 11:44:06 ASau`: have a collection of this "advice" you can share? 11:44:28 I'm aware of some of it, just wondered if there was one place that had a lot of it. 11:44:50 It is in those books forth lovers consider classic. 11:45:02 ah 11:45:48 A fair amount of stuff is in the standard, in bits and pieces. 11:47:07 oh, *that* advice. 11:47:22 nevermind 11:56:29 --- quit: impomatic (Quit: rebooting...) 12:01:52 --- join: impomatic (~chatzilla@87.115.118.174) joined #forth 12:04:44 So should I replace LITERAL with POSTPONE LITERAL ? 12:05:16 Yes. 12:05:33 Unless you use some non-standard definition for "literal". 12:06:45 Thanks. I had to compile the word by hand anyway, so it didn't make too much difference. 13:05:33 --- join: nighty^ (~nighty@tin51-1-82-226-147-104.fbx.proxad.net) joined #forth 13:19:22 literal, schmiteral; mov ax, 3 13:26:11 --- join: forther (~forther@c-71-202-145-159.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) joined #forth 13:44:16 hm. 14:58:18 --- quit: ygrek (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 15:39:44 ASau`: understood, but I only had the couple of posts from the mailing list to refer to 16:00:20 --- quit: forther (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.) 16:44:44 --- quit: gogonkt (Read error: Operation timed out) 16:49:21 --- quit: impomatic (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86.1 [Firefox 3.5.18/20110319140258]) 16:56:37 --- join: gogonkt (~gogonkt@2001:c08:3700:ffff::2:f1f3) joined #forth 17:12:03 --- quit: qFox (Quit: Time for cookies!) 18:02:06 --- quit: gogonkt (Read error: Operation timed out) 18:04:42 --- join: gogonkt (~gogonkt@2001:c08:3700:ffff::3:829) joined #forth 18:12:42 --- join: Deformative (~Joseph@caen-eecs-141-212-212-39.wireless.engin.umich.edu) joined #forth 19:07:58 --- quit: roarde (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 19:16:24 --- join: roarde (~roarde@pdpc/supporter/active/roarde) joined #forth 20:05:35 --- quit: Deformative (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) 20:17:17 --- join: Deformative (~Joseph@200-122.adsl.umnet.umich.edu) joined #forth 20:17:33 --- quit: Deformative (Remote host closed the connection) 20:41:28 --- quit: roarde (Quit: Leaving) 21:08:49 is there a something opposite to immediate? 21:09:24 as in a word taggged with immediate will always execute the code 21:09:29 it's code 21:25:17 did it occur to anyone how aweful jones forth really is 21:39:19 --- quit: cataska (Quit: leaving) 21:44:05 --- join: cataska (~cataska@210.64.6.233) joined #forth 22:00:54 --- join: foocraft (~dsc@dyn-86-36-41-37.wv.qatar.cmu.edu) joined #forth 22:36:40 --- quit: foocraft (Remote host closed the connection) 23:53:32 --- join: ygrek (debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/ygrek) joined #forth 23:57:22 a normal : word 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/11.03.26