00:00:00 --- log: started forth/11.04.27 03:08:15 --- join: ygrek (debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/ygrek) joined #forth 03:25:48 --- join: edakiri (~kiri@212.255.16.68) joined #forth 03:28:24 if the code is in multiple files, how are does linkage happen? Analog for C would be that a build tool (e.g. make) compiles each unit separately and then passes them together to the linker at the end. Analog for Java would be that the object files are sought in a predefined directory structure which is tied to scope. 03:30:08 In C, you may need to manually define the linkage or a tool might be able to extract at least partial information. 03:44:08 --- quit: Snoopy_1611 () 04:10:11 --- quit: ygrek (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 04:31:55 edakiri: If what code is in multiple files? 04:32:11 If it's source code, the files are processed one at a time, adding their words to the vocabulary along the way. 04:38:13 sounds like Ada 04:38:59 the code of a program or programs 05:01:54 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 05:19:35 --- quit: MayDaniel (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 05:32:01 edakiri: When you say "the code" I assume you mean the source? 05:32:11 Not some form of object code? 05:48:25 No, I meant source code, but for C and Java, my examples, there is 1 object code file to be linked for each source code file anyhow. 05:59:19 Well in most (all, in fact) Forth environments I've used there's no object code files. You have the runtime environment and you can load files into it as if they were typed at the prompt. 05:59:36 When you "compiled" it basically just made an image of the runtime with the words you included from source. 05:59:50 I'm sure there's Forth systems that don't work that way, but I've never used one so I wouldn't know. 06:16:18 Would anyone personally like to recommend a Forth tutorial or guide or is active in maintaining one? I tried the GForth tutorial, but I encountered some holes and am discouraged from using it. 06:18:04 --- quit: edakiri (Remote host closed the connection) 06:18:39 Starting Forth by Brodie. 06:19:15 http://www.forth.com/starting-forth/index.html 06:26:31 --- join: edakiri (~kiri@212.255.30.110) joined #forth 06:28:07 ttmrichter: thanks for the tip. I'll check it out 07:04:04 --- nick: nixness -> foocraft 07:30:55 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 07:42:47 --- quit: MayDaniel (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 09:39:40 Are words "R@" and "I" identical, I'm suspicious of a misprint. 09:42:48 edakiri: they are identical in my Forth, not sure if they are guaranteed to be identical always 09:47:27 a forth may have loop indexes somewhere other than the address stack, so I could return something different than R@ 09:51:22 --- quit: ttmrichter (Quit: No wonder these puppets are always in a lousy mood.) 10:47:28 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 10:48:50 I do not understand why this behaves as it does. What is DUPed and why? : INC-COUNT DO I . DUP +LOOP DROP ; 10:52:18 --- join: roarde (~roarde@pdpc/supporter/active/roarde) joined #forth 11:09:52 I got it i think. took a while. 11:12:10 yeah. that's how you found that word, no stack comments or anything? 11:12:23 stack comments make it a lot easier to figure out 11:12:38 it amazes me how many people can't be bothered to comment their code 11:26:28 --- quit: MayDaniel (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 11:35:10 I'm learning forth and that comes from a tutorial, "Starting Forth". I just did not realize what to expect where on the stack and that the loop increment is consumed on each iteration. 11:36:18 All the necessary information was in the text, just not in my head. 11:42:31 DocPlatypus: I seldom put comments in the code, other than stack comments. I document the functions separately most of the time. 11:47:56 --- part: roarde left #forth 11:52:14 edakiri: ah. yeah the proper stack comment would be ( inc end begin -- ) or similar 11:53:41 Is there a standard No Op word? 11:55:56 edakiri: GNU Forth uses dummy, I'm not sure if it is in the standard, you can always define it yourself. 11:55:58 : noop ; 11:56:39 hmm. not in the gforth word index. 11:57:01 but it accepts it fine. 11:57:56 thanks again, DocPlatypus. thanks previously, crc 12:09:17 edakiri: that's interesting question. 12:09:28 edakiri: I'm not aware of defsystem tools in Forth. 12:10:16 edakiri: "r@" and "i" are not identical in general case. 12:10:18 --- join: Snoopy_1611 (Snoopy_161@dslb-178-004-069-187.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #forth 12:12:07 --- join: ygrek (debian-tor@gateway/tor-sasl/ygrek) joined #forth 12:12:57 --- join: I440r (~mark4@108-64-168-250.lightspeed.wepbfl.sbcglobal.net) joined #forth 12:13:07 --- mode: ChanServ set +o I440r 12:14:39 "Starting Forth" defines them both as "Copies the top of the return stack without affecting it." 12:17:38 "Starting Forth" is wrong. 12:18:11 It is out of date for 15 years. 12:26:40 it is wrong,it is out of date, thers nothing to replace it thats even CLOSE to as worth reading as it STILL IS 12:28:00 There're enough books to replace it. 12:28:16 SF isn't even worth reading. 12:28:23 It deals with problems that don't exist today. 12:28:33 Not for starting programmer. 12:29:39 In 1984 beginner programmer worked with machines that had 48K RAM. 12:29:41 Or less. 12:30:08 Nowadays beginner programmer works with machines that have 2 GB RAM. 12:30:14 At _least_ 2GB. 12:32:49 In 1984 there was sense in ignoring OS and working with bare iron. 12:33:31 Today you are not allowed to bypass OS, and you don't need it, actually. 12:34:46 utter bullshit 12:34:52 show me the OS on an avr 12:34:54 or an 8051 12:34:57 or a pic 12:35:07 forth IS the os when working with forth 12:35:54 Right, all beginner programmers insist on programming AVR. 12:36:04 And 8051 especially. 12:36:12 Or PIC :) 12:37:13 so learn on a machine with w846592645924652 gigs of ram that executes 400 trillion opcodes per nano second. then try write efficient code for an avr/8051 12:37:31 Yes. 12:37:32 starting forth has ALOT going for it 12:37:46 it is still a damned good place to start when learning forth 12:37:48 You don't learn running with attempts to run very fast. 12:38:13 And SF is written for beginner programmers. 12:38:35 None of them are exposed to PIC without prior experience. 12:39:01 Plus, Forth doesn't excel in performance on those MCUs. 12:39:43 it does on the 8051 and avr :) 12:39:47 nothing excells on a pic 12:40:06 Compared to what? To another Forth? 12:40:19 to c or asm or another forth 12:40:21 you pick 12:40:38 C code has native performance, Forth is bogged down by its threaded code. 12:40:42 my avr forth is lightyears more efficient than anything gcc produces 12:40:50 utter BULLSHIT 12:41:06 What does it do faster than GCC? 12:41:08 you dont need every single fucking fucntion to be optimized down to the cycle 12:41:10 NOOP loop? 12:41:32 and switching to/from assembler in forth is FAR FAR cleaner than in c 12:42:24 so by using high level (oooh soooo not so very slow anyway) threaded forth for the non critical sections you keep code size negligable 12:42:32 and switch to nice asm where time is an issue 12:43:14 if your the kind of guy that does instruction level optimizations at EVERY PLACE in his code then your a moron. period 12:44:07 USB bootloaders for the avr contain a CDC usb driver and a simple command interpreter to recieve and flash data to the application section 12:44:14 they usually take up 4k 12:44:31 my entire fucking forhth kernel PLUS its cdc isnt much larger than 3k 12:52:04 --- quit: edakiri (Quit: Leaving.) 13:05:18 Forth the language has changed, probably more so than C or FORTRAN have in the past 20 years... however I'd say most of the basics are still the same 13:06:43 and what startin forth excells at teaching is how to visualize and manipulate the stack 13:07:20 I notice with GNU Forth... a lot of things are written as primitives that I'd like to see how to actually do in Forth itself. the "Forth is written in Forth" thing isn't really as true now as it used to be 13:07:45 atually the kernel usually IS coded 13:07:58 you have to execute at the processor level somewhere 13:08:15 yes, it's like geometry 13:08:21 like + - dup drop swap etc etc are all primatives and are pretty usually coded primatives 13:08:22 you have to postulate something to have something to base theorems on 13:08:43 but : rot >r swap r> swap ; is one primative that you often see as a colon def 13:09:15 yes... I considered writing my own Forth. I want to find out what the minimum number and set of words that must be in code, after which you can write everything else in Forth 13:09:29 and asau saying threaded forths are slow is a crock of shit from a forth hater. most of forth inc's forths are native not threaded anyway 13:09:43 I remember seeing somewhere, someone made a definition for + that depends on xor and something else 13:09:49 --- join: roarde (~roarde@pdpc/supporter/active/roarde) joined #forth 13:09:51 but I'll be damned if I can find it now 13:09:59 it's a bitch searching for Forth code with Google, btw. 13:10:01 and even on a shitty slow 8051 my DIRECT threaded forth produces runs forth aps at least as fast as the compiled c 13:10:24 well xor IS an addition but it doesnt propogate the carries up the bits :) 13:10:41 you looked at isforth? 13:10:48 I440r: not yet 13:10:51 thats my linux forth. coded in asm 13:11:01 i wouldnt TOUCH anhy forth coded in c 13:11:05 and gforth is coded in c 13:11:08 horrible idea 13:11:27 --- quit: Triplefault (Quit: Leaving) 13:12:45 I may be up for porting some of my favorite GNU-isms to isforth 13:12:50 but... there are a ton of them. 13:12:58 such as? 13:13:05 let's see... 13:13:10 require is the first one 13:13:24 as in an auto include? 13:13:30 I tried getting that working in pforth... no dice 13:13:43 isforth places a restriction of nesting includes no deepter than 5 levels. i discourage any more than 2 levels 13:14:03 i think files including files including files including files ad=infinitum is a MAJOR MAJOR mistake 13:14:05 very bad 13:14:07 that's fine 13:14:29 i always use a load file and SPECIFICALLY include everything thats needed by the app 13:14:43 a feature I'd like to see is the ability to build a dependency chain, and then have some way of extracting just the words I need out of the source files 13:14:47 if file y is required and file y requires file z i include file z prior to including file y 13:14:59 oh 13:15:03 something else require does 13:15:21 if you require something that's already been loaded... it becomes a no-op 13:15:59 --- quit: ygrek (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 13:16:11 well i personally think all of the above is bad form, i prefer my users to know exactly what got included and where -but if you port it to isforth i'd be happy to include it :) 13:16:35 is there an Ubuntu package for it? 13:16:38 fpc had a similar mechanism but every file included created a string in memory of the file name 13:17:05 It is I440r saying that threaded code is fast what is crock of shit. 13:17:08 nope. thers only a gzip. download it, use nasm to create the kernel and then run ./extend to create the extended forth 13:17:15 Threaded code is DAMN slow. 13:17:21 threaded code is FAST ENOUGH 13:17:30 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 13:17:31 On 8051, right. 13:17:32 I440r: URL? 13:17:39 its only damned slow when every fucking thing you ever have to do has to happen in no more than 2 clock cycles 13:17:42 www.isforth.com 13:17:56 which is as moronic as moronic can be 13:18:28 DocPlatypus, btw. ive claimed for years that isforth is the fastest compiler of any non trivial lanuage. ive yet to have anyone actually disprove that so i continue to claim it :P 13:18:56 Yeah. 13:19:02 what i need to write is a random source puker so taht i can create 9 or 10 gigs of forht source (in bunches of files) and have isforth compile it all 13:19:11 and reliablbly benchmark the compile speed 13:19:11 LOL 13:19:16 John-noone-can-catch. 13:19:16 random source puker 13:19:24 Why cannot anyone? 13:19:28 Because nobody cares. 13:20:04 because everyone has their head stuffed up their ass developing applications in a language that takes orders of magnitude longer to develop with and creates executables that are orders of magnitude larger 13:20:13 Oh, right. 13:20:14 and take hours to compile what i would compil in seconds 13:20:26 What has you written in your own dialect of Forth? 13:20:56 what does it matter. you would hate on it no matter what it was 13:21:01 your a forth hater. 13:21:21 Oh, so you haven't written anything worth mentioning. 13:21:30 not to you 13:21:40 Tell it not to me, to the world. 13:21:57 People write ray tracers and algorithmic music in Haskell. 13:21:59 k, then. Have you written anything that's worth not mentioning to ASau? 13:22:12 (word order is intended) 13:22:47 but ok. i wrote a testbed that hooked up to an array of isolaated radios and configured attenuators between them to simulate distance. the radios were supposed to auto build a mesh network using a FHSS ip stack 13:22:53 ...And they do that in Haskell because it is DAMN FAST AND EASY to write those things in Haskell. 13:23:06 my test bed to control and test the network is still in use at itron i believe 13:23:23 i wrote it in a week. then they tried to get some windows guru to create a windows version of it 13:23:28 6 months later he didnt have shit 13:24:19 roarde ive written teathered forths for the 8051 and avr (avr is in progress) and have used same on multiple contracts 13:24:21 It could be argument, if your program ran on windows. 13:24:25 But it isn't. 13:25:02 no. it runs in a save, secure, FAST environment thats not plagued with key loggers viruses spyware and malware 13:25:28 and if you want to pay my 200 an hour i would be happy to port isforth to windows 13:25:45 Oh, you're still living a decade ago :) 13:25:51 port windows to isforth 13:25:56 LOL 13:26:03 roarde why cripple isforth? :) 13:26:21 asau why do you even bother to come in here. just to spread the hate all the time? 13:26:30 That's exactly what I said, I440r. 13:26:31 your an annoying fuck with nothing positive to say about anything 13:26:53 not that i would kick you out :) 13:27:47 I have some positive things to say. 13:27:56 Forth is dying out. 13:28:00 And this is really good. 13:28:14 forth is about as dying out as c is 13:28:27 but its moving into hardware 13:28:30 Oh, and C is really dying out. 13:28:48 you know intel spent billions with a capital BILLIONS trying to implemnent a processor microcided in c? 13:28:50 Try to find projects in C, and you'll see that. 13:28:51 which is very, very good 13:29:09 cm wrote a vlsi editor in forth and uses that to create 140+ core micro processors 13:29:25 which he can't write a forth for 13:29:32 Who uses them besides CM? 13:29:51 no idea who his customers are 13:30:07 but nasa has been using processors cm developed for donkeys years 13:30:17 nasa uses forth A LOT 13:30:30 and we all know how DUMB the guys at nasa are1 13:30:32 And the system you're typing your replies at runs Intel CPU most likely. 13:30:35 your so much smarter 13:31:01 which again. everyone knows are good! 13:31:02 eh 13:31:13 lik division is futile, approximated you will be 13:31:30 and cm's chips execute BIPS not MIPS :P~ 13:31:31 State-sponsored corporations use weird stuff frequently. 13:31:37 with very VEFRY low power usage 13:32:02 and also. every single device intel ever produced is subject to glitching 13:32:04 ALL of them 13:32:06 every 13:32:07 single 13:32:09 last 13:32:11 mother fucking 13:32:13 one of them 13:32:42 We're yet to see at least WiFi hardware which is programmed in Forth. 13:32:43 tho i do love the 8051 :))) 13:32:52 eh? 13:32:56 shows how much YOU know 13:32:58 Forth is sooo effective language to develop in :) 13:33:15 Go forth and fullfill the world 13:33:23 Right, I don't know anything. :) 13:33:28 if you pulled your head out of your ass you would see that it isnt just effective, its the ONLY one that is effective 13:33:41 you prove that every time you speak in here 13:33:51 Somehow my box here and at work don't run Forth-controlled hardware. 13:34:02 Perhaps Forth has filled the world up. 13:34:09 lol i bet some of it does even if you dont know it 13:34:27 How much do you bet? 13:34:36 Demonstrate it. 13:35:10 ASau: Can you write good code in forth? 13:35:23 HE probably cant :) 13:35:30 I can write good code in any language I know. 13:35:44 It all depends on what you want it for. 13:35:45 Do you know forth, ASau? 13:36:02 I know it from ground up. 13:36:08 Better than I440r. 13:36:12 he knows alot of the buzz words. ive yet to see a demonstration of any real knowledge 13:36:22 Do you have any extant good forth code? 13:36:24 oh. whers asauforth? 13:36:37 Why does the world need yet another Forth? 13:36:42 I440r: I have a URL for that, but nevermind. 13:36:48 lol 13:37:03 not a joke 13:37:17 Plus, I'm doing most of my personal stuff in Lisp nowadays. 13:37:17 you have a link for asauforth? 13:37:34 It is faster and easier. 13:37:34 yes. lisp. the language that was so crappy cm developed forth 13:37:43 Right. 13:37:56 That's why Lisp systems are more successful commercially. :) 13:38:01 Nobody wants them. 13:38:07 It'd be up to ASau to provide the link, assuming such exists. 13:38:43 Perhaps CM has done something comparable to what ITA does. 13:38:56 asau you go out and buy microsoft C version 1.0 and ill go buy microsoft forth version 1.0 13:39:04 when i discover a bug in my compiler ILL FIX IT 13:39:14 But really, there's quite a lot of coded forth out there . . . 13:39:14 Where's the forth code and the flying cars? 13:39:19 when you discover a bug you will wait 2 years for microsoft to acknowldege it and then PAY for the upgrade 13:39:39 When I discover bug, I'll fix it either. 13:39:49 when you have paid for every upgrade from v1.0 to the current v2349.12 yu will have thousands of dollars invested 13:39:54 Only I don't need to pay to Microsoft. 13:39:56 ill have the price of v1.0 invested 13:40:29 right im sure you can fix every bug you find in msvc++ and vbasic etc 13:40:57 Only when I need to process XML and do it quick, I don't want to write parser myself. 13:40:58 ms knows im not going to be spending much money with them after buying ms forth v1.0 because i wont need to 13:41:15 but they DO know your dumb enough to keep paying them for every new bug they create 13:41:22 every new security flaw they implement 13:41:48 Oh? 13:42:03 also. every MORON like you AND his autistic brother code c and they all learned it in 2 hours 13:42:03 Do you mean that you don't have security flaws in l00n1x? 13:42:12 and never progressed beyond that point of experties 13:42:31 on the other hand those same people looking at forht for the first time go screamin for mamma just like you 13:42:44 Ha-ha. 13:43:19 Everyone around is idiot, and you're the only smart person in the world. 13:43:31 Oh, right. 13:43:33 cuz there is no "teach yourself forth in 2.5 hours" 13:43:39 CM and ams. 13:43:54 So? 13:43:58 mamma didn't care what forth did to me :~( 13:44:05 lol 13:44:15 and neither do you 13:44:20 Do you mean that you can teach more by using examples like in SF? 13:44:31 Don't make me laugh. 13:45:08 Scheme courses take same short terms, but they teach way more. 13:45:34 just think: what if each 10 lines here were 1 line of code, pick your language 13:46:30 ive been coding 18 hours a day for over a month 13:46:33 * roarde doesn't see the reason that forth's not basically learnable in 2.5 hours 13:46:40 some time out to hate back at asau is relaxation :) 13:46:45 tho it's not 13:47:02 roarde it IS if you apply yourself 13:47:14 but to truely learn to code in ANY language takes a minimum of 10 years 13:47:30 should I be using an adhesive or staples? 13:47:39 yes 13:47:46 Hm. 13:47:49 Well... 13:48:02 If you need to implement almost everything yourself, it does take that long. 13:48:34 Reasonable people don't implement everything themselves. 13:48:42 It just isn't reasonable. 13:48:50 Please have the person who learned forth in less than 3 hours memo me. 13:48:53 --- quit: MayDaniel () 13:48:58 I really need some pointers. 13:49:22 I learned it relatively quickly, but I knew other languages 13:49:29 I don't know if I beat the 3 hour mark though 13:49:32 right. or yu can use canned code and end up with a target executable thats 400 times larger than had you known your ass from a hole in the ground 13:50:00 drag, drop, cut, paste, look ma im a coder1 13:50:54 then you have the issue where that precompiled module ALMOST fits what i need to do... i know, lets MASH IT IN so it fits 13:51:09 100 Kb * 400 ~ 40 MB. 13:51:12 This is reasonable. 13:51:14 that way i wont actually have to ever create anything myself 13:51:30 i can just put all the ingredients into the easy bake oven and ill get my cake 13:52:01 Given that you don't spend your personal time writing your 13:52:01 code, repeating design mistakes others did, redesigning, 13:52:01 rewriting and so on, this is really reasonable. 13:52:09 Opposite is not reasonable at all. 13:53:02 yes. its unreasonalbe to expect engineers to have walked the school of hard knocks by actually DOING THE FUCING SHIT themselves 13:53:06 yea. 13:53:13 Oh? 13:53:29 your not an engineer. your a burger flip who knows everything 13:53:30 Engineers don't study topology and fundamental mathematics. 13:53:42 you dont create anyting of your own you just bad mouth everything everyone else creates 13:53:49 while your there expertly flipping burgers 13:53:51 They don't study fundamentals of numeric methods. 13:54:09 oh your a theoretical mathematician then? 13:54:16 no wonder. that splanes everything 13:54:36 No, I know what engineers study and what they don't study at all. 13:54:39 your the guy that thinks math IS the reason for math. doing stuff with math is WRONG i tell you! 13:54:48 Ha-ha. 13:54:58 WRONG. 13:55:21 It is you, who thinks that you need to study fundamental math to utilize its results. 13:55:29 theorteical mathemeticians develop some very clever algorithms that help them create more clever algorithms 13:55:41 Right. 13:55:52 practical mathemeticians create clever algorithms that help them create something real and useful to the world 13:55:52 And I use those clever algorithms without studying math. 13:56:03 Because I don't need that. 13:56:16 how do I compile and run isforth? 13:56:17 you dont create anything 13:56:19 you use 13:56:29 roarde do you have nasm installed? 13:56:33 nasm is the netwide assembler 13:56:34 Yes, I don't create anything in mathematics. 13:56:44 Because I'm not mathematician and chose not to be. 13:56:45 run make and it will assemble the kernel sources and create "kernel.com" 13:56:50 0.98.39 13:56:55 then you run ./extend and that will create ./isforth 13:57:13 nasm: fatal: unrecognised output format `elf32' - use -hf for a list 13:57:15 erm isforth i still only 32 biths tho 13:57:26 :) 13:57:32 64 bit was still too new when i wrote the kernel 13:57:41 and as the kernel is asm.. . . 13:57:43 Portability is fantastic. 13:57:55 a fantastic MYTH 13:57:57 You can't write Forth in Forth? 13:58:11 chicken... egg... 13:58:21 It doesn't matter at all. 13:58:29 isforth doesnt have an assembler extension yet either so how am i going to create a metacompiler 13:58:39 tho your an expert at forth so you knew this 13:58:43 cuz you know everything 13:58:52 unlike C which of course just implants itself naturally on a system, one must have a forth BEFORE using it 13:58:55 --- join: grai_ (~grai@38.70.70.115.static.exetel.com.au) joined #forth 13:59:07 MIT Scheme, Glasgow Haskell, Gnu Ada, CMU Common Lisp, 13:59:14 so: compiling isforth? 13:59:15 and lot more are written in their own languages. 13:59:33 --- quit: grai (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 13:59:39 roarde ? 13:59:51 make doesn't work 13:59:53 make <-- builds isforths kernel 14:00:00 you on a 32 bit system? 14:00:02 see error message, above 14:00:07 yeppers, none else 14:00:15 linux? 14:00:30 roarde: welcome to the world of cross-compilation. Prepare to build cross-compiler tools. :) 14:00:36 right (shouldn't matter tho, should it really?) 14:00:51 isforth is linux/32 bit 14:00:55 it does matter. it shouldn't matter 14:01:05 if you have a 32 bit linux and nasm then make should work 14:01:36 ("make" is written in Forth, of course.) 14:01:56 I'm on a 32 bit linux with the nasm version posted above, for which make outputs the excerpted error shown above. 14:02:06 what does nasm -hf report? 14:02:19 I440r: any plans to make a 64 bit version? 14:02:29 DocPlatypus, its on the todo list ya 14:02:42 but completing the assembler and writing a metacompiler comes first 14:02:53 thers a number of gothyas i cant fix till im metacompiling 14:03:06 among the output: bin (describes bin), aout, aoutb, coff, elf, as86 obj, win32, rdf, ieee 14:03:08 plus i can reduce the size of the kernel drastically by moving a bunch of it into extensions 14:03:14 descriptions of each 14:03:22 change elf32 to elf in the src/kernel/Makefile 14:03:42 * roarde slaps forehead 14:03:44 i think you need to upgrade your nasm tho 14:03:48 of course! 14:03:56 im using 2.09.04 14:03:59 (it's a later version than in your readme) 14:04:21 so how do I make that change using isforth? 14:04:22 the newer nasms support 64 bit so the -felf was split into -felf32 and -felf64 or something 14:04:31 (I'm not fond of any text editors) 14:04:31 yes. it SHOULD work still heh 14:04:39 i use joe. i cant abide vi 14:04:57 isforth doesnt have a built in editor. 14:05:01 joe (well, "jstar") here. But I'd rather use isforth. 14:05:20 No editor? Please remind me why I'm compiling it. 14:05:31 maybe one day ill write an editor in isforth but thers no need for one :) 14:05:59 roarde because by studying isforths direct threaded architecutre your more likely to learn how forth works than using some crappy C based forth 14:06:09 and you dont need a built in editor 14:06:26 roarde: just don't make mistakes :) 14:06:48 tho ive been toying with the idea of creating one its not high on my todo if i decide to do so 14:06:55 I need an editor. Build it wherever you like. Builtin, builtout, rebuilt, I don't care. 14:07:05 It's the unbuilt editors that bother me. 14:07:16 the idea was to have isforth shell out to whatever you had in $EDITOR 14:07:26 but i didnt implement that yet. again.. not high on todo. 14:07:35 ./isforht -fload some/source/file.f 14:07:54 I don't care for $VISUAL. And I'm certainly not gonna spend a lot of time in ed. 14:07:59 use two tabs in your terminal. one tab is for isforth. the other for the editor 14:08:08 try joe 14:08:15 ^ks to save. ^kx to quit 14:08:25 Once again: WHY am I compiling isforth? 14:08:28 no need for escape colon shift alt backspace backspace f12 14:08:39