00:00:00 --- log: started forth/11.12.19
00:07:29 --- join: jyfl987 (~jyf@124.65.163.2) joined #forth
00:40:35 <ASau``> Well...
00:40:47 <ASau``> There are things that make it different, actually.
00:41:11 <ASau``> I doubt you can write it as easily as in Prolog or some FPL.
00:41:15 <ASau``> Or even Lisp!
00:42:04 <ASau``> Or it will be reimplementation of respective facilities, like anonymous functions or/and closures.
00:42:41 <ASau``> I agree that it is more like designing parser in C.
00:42:47 --- nick: ASau`` -> ASau
00:49:30 <ASau> On another hand, what is different to C that you can
00:49:30 <ASau> introduce support to generate code directly rather than
00:49:30 <ASau> implementing state machine inside.
01:39:31 --- join: ASau` (~user@95-26-89-189.broadband.corbina.ru) joined #forth
01:39:56 --- quit: karswell (Remote host closed the connection)
01:42:50 --- quit: ASau (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
01:48:18 <jyfl987> ASau`: it seems that you like lisp
03:53:23 --- quit: DGASAU` (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
03:54:11 --- join: DGASAU` (~user@91.218.144.129) joined #forth
03:54:36 --- join: swiley (~swiley@142.sub-75-197-195.myvzw.com) joined #forth
04:12:07 --- join: shachaf_ (~shachaf@204.109.63.130) joined #forth
04:15:37 --- join: angstrom1 (~Unknown@puma.picklum.net) joined #forth
04:15:47 --- quit: dom96 (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
04:15:48 --- quit: angstrom (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
04:15:48 --- quit: segher (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
04:15:48 --- quit: nottwo (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
04:15:48 --- quit: shachaf (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
04:15:48 --- join: dom96 (~dom96@unaffiliated/dom96) joined #forth
04:16:11 --- join: segher (~segher@5ED3C3A7.cm-7-4d.dynamic.ziggo.nl) joined #forth
04:16:13 --- nick: angstrom1 -> angstrom
04:16:19 --- join: nottwo_ (~trannie@nottwo.org) joined #forth
04:16:37 --- quit: angstrom (Changing host)
04:16:37 --- join: angstrom (~Unknown@unaffiliated/angstrom) joined #forth
04:20:44 --- quit: eldre (*.net *.split)
04:21:26 --- join: eldre (~eldre@sd-11738.dedibox.fr) joined #forth
04:24:37 --- quit: jyfl987 (Quit: leaving)
04:26:29 --- quit: eldre (*.net *.split)
04:28:48 --- join: eldre (~eldre@sd-11738.dedibox.fr) joined #forth
04:33:37 --- join: karswell (~coat@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk) joined #forth
05:12:47 --- join: _spt_ (~postmaste@host-92-4-103-101.as43234.net) joined #forth
05:12:47 --- quit: _spt_ (Changing host)
05:12:47 --- join: _spt_ (~postmaste@unaffiliated/-spt-/x-5624824) joined #forth
05:38:25 --- quit: Fox78 (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
05:46:29 --- join: nighty- (~nighty@static-68-179-124-161.ptr.terago.net) joined #forth
05:51:23 --- join: Fox78 (~fox@123.118.149.174) joined #forth
05:56:12 --- quit: ttmrichter (Quit: Leaving)
05:57:11 --- join: saon (~saon@mire.hcoop.net) joined #forth
06:27:31 --- quit: Fox78 (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
06:38:40 --- join: xpololz (~xpol@50.80-203-124.nextgentel.com) joined #forth
06:41:10 --- join: Fox78 (~fox@123.118.158.161) joined #forth
07:01:56 --- join: fantazo (~fantazo@178-190-233-246.adsl.highway.telekom.at) joined #forth
09:02:49 --- part: _spt_ left #forth
09:18:40 --- quit: karswell (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
09:27:17 --- join: karswell (~coat@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk) joined #forth
09:47:58 --- nick: shachaf_ -> shachaf
10:11:00 --- join: davazp (~user@89.100.226.133) joined #forth
11:09:16 <truefx> how can i redefine if else then structure using my own " ise degilse sonra " words  in the same way if else then works ?
11:10:12 <ASau`> : если postpone if ; immediate
11:10:27 <ASau`> : иначе postpone else ; immediate
11:10:37 <ASau`> : всё postpone then ; immediate
11:15:42 <ASau`> If Forth would have clean separation between word name and
11:15:43 <ASau`> word behaviour, one could just make words completely synomous.
11:16:14 <ASau`> But it doesn't have that separation, hence the hack.
11:16:18 <truefx> what do u mean exactly ?
11:16:32 <ASau`> What exactly is unclear above?
11:16:52 <ASau`> You cannot get word semantics and assign it to another denotation.
11:16:54 <truefx> clean seperation part 
11:17:27 <ASau`> And you cannot compare whether two words have identical semantics.
11:17:51 <ASau`> E.g. for the above all you can do is
11:18:02 <ASau`> ' если ' if =
11:18:10 <ASau`> sometimes, because it isn't guaranteed.
11:18:29 <ASau`> And even if you can get execution tokens, they may differ.
11:18:39 <ASau`> (And they do most frequently.)
11:19:51 <truefx> btw i ve chosen to install vfxforth
11:20:09 <truefx> anything wrong with it for a beginner ?
11:44:07 --- quit: davazp (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
11:46:54 --- quit: swiley (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
12:06:19 --- quit: saon (Quit: Lost terminal)
12:12:46 <truefx> how can i redefine : and ; words : :> postpone : ; immediate   : ... postpone ; ; immediate does not work as it was the case for if else then
12:23:15 --- quit: fantazo (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
12:43:57 --- join: davazp (~user@89.100.226.133) joined #forth
13:04:02 --- join: tathi (~josh@dsl-216-227-95-32.fairpoint.net) joined #forth
13:06:56 <tathi> truefx: colon is not immediate
13:07:21 <tathi> You want `: :> : ;`
13:08:46 <truefx> :> for  : (defining words)          ... for ending word definitions and if its possible a different delimiter for words other than space
13:11:07 <truefx> tathi, ?
13:11:17 <tathi> Why?
13:11:58 <truefx> why not ? is it too hard to do it ?
13:12:37 <tathi> You can't change the word delimiter easily.  The other two are trivial, but totally pointless.
13:13:01 <truefx> ok then lets focus on trivial ones 
13:13:02 <tathi> If you expect anyone else to read your code and help you with it, it's an extremely bad idea.
13:13:09 <truefx> how to do it 
13:13:21 <tathi> You have those.
13:13:29 <tathi> Your definition for ... was fine
13:13:35 <truefx> i dont expect anyone else to read my code in international community
13:14:03 <truefx> but it gives an error in gforth and vfx forth
13:14:06 <tathi> Your definition for :> was wrong because : is not immediate -- I gave you the correct one above.
13:14:51 <tathi> Then you're doing something else wrong.
13:15:11 <tathi> : :> : ;
13:15:11 <tathi> : ... postpone ; ; immediate
13:15:11 <tathi> :> foo ." testing..." cr ...
13:15:11 <tathi> foo
13:15:46 <truefx> thx a lot
13:15:57 <truefx> it works now
13:16:10 <truefx> 1 more thing
13:16:29 <truefx> lets say that i want to use my words in gforth or vfxlin . A Turkish replacement  for all English words. But i dont want to issue include mywords.fs each time i launch compiler. What am i supposed to do ?
13:17:14 <truefx> even if i do try a few words it produces error
13:18:13 <tathi> gforth doesn't have any sort of config file that is loaded on startup, so your only option would be to build a new one, I think.
13:18:17 <tathi> Don't know about VFX
13:18:36 <truefx> is there anything wrong with : someword immediate;
13:18:40 <tathi> Actually, you might just be able to build a new gforth image -- look up in the manual about building images.
13:18:52 <tathi> probably
13:19:22 <tathi> You need a space between immediate and the semicolon
13:19:25 <truefx> nope right but when i include same line from a file using include it produces error
13:19:34 <truefx> there is
13:19:40 <tathi> what same line?
13:19:43 <truefx> my typo now sorry
13:20:01 <tathi> that will make someword do the same thing as immediate
13:20:18 <tathi> It won't make someword an immediate word that does nothing.
13:20:40 <tathi> So...depending on what you want, there may or may not be something wrong with it.
13:20:46 <truefx> nope i try to do first thing
13:21:06 <truefx> just a Turkish word for immediate
13:21:28 <truefx> in fact i try to localize forth in someway
13:21:38 <tathi> Should work fine then.
13:22:01 <truefx> but i dont know if this should be the way
13:22:41 <truefx> or is it to primitive to redefine all forth words in a file and include them ?
13:24:44 <truefx> include tpd.fth 
13:24:44 <truefx> Including tpd.fth
13:24:44 <truefx> Err# -13 ERR: Undefined word.
13:24:44 <truefx>  Source: "tpd.fth" on line 4 
13:24:44 <truefx>  -> : hemen immediate ;
13:25:15 <truefx> same error in gforth and vfx
13:25:46 <truefx> tathi, any idea ? 
13:31:26 <tathi> no
13:31:39 <tathi> looks fine
13:32:21 <truefx> when i type same think in compiler windows its fine no problem
13:32:39 <truefx> but when i try to include i produces error
13:36:03 --- quit: karswell (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
13:39:26 <davazp> truefx: : someword ; immediate
13:39:51 <davazp> try it
13:40:29 <truefx> i want someword to do exact thing with immediate
13:40:49 <truefx> not nothing
13:40:51 <davazp> oh, I misunderstood
13:41:15 <truefx> any idea about above error ?
13:41:42 <truefx> in compiler no error but when i use include this same line gives error
13:42:08 <truefx> : ertele postpone ;  gives no error
13:42:22 <truefx> : hemen immediate ;           errorrrrrr
13:43:29 <truefx> hemen is undefined but this is what i try to do define it :)
13:44:04 <davazp> oh yes
13:44:08 <davazp> do you have both definitions?
13:44:37 <davazp> I think the first is wrong
13:44:47 <davazp> postpone is `immediate', it consumes the ; 
13:45:00 <davazp> so forth is trying to compile : hemen in the boyd of ertele
13:45:08 <davazp> you should put an extra ;
13:45:19 <davazp> : ertele postpone ; ;
13:46:31 <davazp> (and you should make ertele immediate, probably)
13:54:31 <truefx> let me see
13:55:29 <truefx> include tpd.fth 
13:55:29 <truefx> tpd.fth:5: unstructured 
13:55:29 <truefx> : ise ertele if >>>;<<< hemen
13:55:29 <truefx> Backtrace:
13:55:29 <truefx> $7FE7FBEF5988 throw 
13:55:30 <truefx> $7FE7FBF054E0 c(abort") 
13:55:32 <truefx> $7FE7FBF124F0 def? 
13:55:34 <truefx> $7FE7FBEFE8C0 ;-hook 
13:55:37 <davazp> I asume ertele is an alias for ;, I don't understand what you want :)
13:55:41 <truefx> extra ; gives this
13:56:00 <davazp> I see, so, you want ertele to be an alias for postpone
13:56:01 <truefx> ertele is alias for postpone
13:56:15 <davazp> ertele is wrong anyway
13:56:20 <davazp> define it so:
13:56:33 <truefx> those are Turkish translations of immediate and postpone
13:56:45 <truefx> why ?
13:56:54 <truefx> is it wrong ?
13:56:58 <davazp> truefx: the same reason I said, it consumes the ;
13:57:35 <davazp> postpone is immediate
13:57:48 <davazp> : ertele postpone postpone ; immediate
13:57:53 <davazp> should work
13:58:20 <truefx> same for hemen ?
13:58:43 <davazp> hemen seems good, because immediate is not immediate itself
13:59:33 <truefx> tpd.fth:7: expected orig 
13:59:33 <truefx> : sonra >>>then<<< ; hemen
13:59:33 <truefx> Backtrace:
13:59:33 <truefx> $7F0A6D311988 throw 
13:59:33 <truefx> $7F0A6D3215A8 c(abort") 
13:59:33 <truefx> $7F0A6D3220F0 orig?
13:59:38 <truefx> so many errors
13:59:45 <davazp> see
13:59:48 <davazp> : ` postpone postpone ; immediate
13:59:57 <truefx> how can i know which words are immediate which ones are not ?
13:59:59 <davazp> it is an alias for postpone which I use in a code
14:00:21 <truefx> do u type it all the time ?
14:00:31 <truefx> or load it from a file ?
14:01:00 <davazp> it is used locally in a file, but it works
14:01:09 <davazp> I think it is a common definition
14:01:58 <truefx> do u use English words in forth ?
14:02:28 <davazp> truefx: control-flow words and parsing word are usually immediate
14:02:35 <truefx> or do you try to localize all words in forth to program in your native language ?
14:03:02 <davazp> truefx: well, I only wrote a program in Forth, so I don't write a lot of code
14:03:18 <davazp> but I used english words
14:03:32 <truefx> i have 1 days acquintance with forth
14:03:49 <truefx> lookin at it it control structure 
14:04:19 <truefx> someone in compiler channel has suggested to analyse stack based languages 
14:04:38 <davazp> I learnt Forth to implement it (because it it easy)
14:05:03 <truefx> in fact i try to write my compiler in my own language right now just trying to customize forth words translate i mean
14:05:07 <tathi> truefx: you need to know which words have special compilation semantics... they should be   : x postpone y ; immediate
14:05:09 <davazp> Forth programming is little crazy but you have fun :)
14:05:16 <tathi> normal words should be  : x y ;
14:05:38 <truefx> yeah no probles with normal words
14:05:54 <truefx> i have done it for if else then structure too 
14:06:20 <truefx> using immediate asuu told me to do so
14:07:02 <truefx> davazp, probably in the end i ll try to implement forth itself just to learn something
14:07:16 <truefx> before i try to implement my own language
14:07:42 <truefx> any directions for that ? links documents to implement forth in forth ?
14:08:03 --- quit: xpololz (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
14:08:25 <truefx> in fact forth is very similar to what i try to do. Turkish is very similar to RPN 
14:09:59 <truefx> and i want to program as if i write in my own language. Using , to seperate words . to finish definitions (sentences ) and be able to use space in word names
14:10:45 <davazp> truefx: if you have programming experience already (in any language), only try to
14:10:47 <truefx> not : two-word ; but : two words something makes.
14:11:06 <truefx> i have in c pascal assembly
14:11:43 <truefx> i ve done a toy compiler in a few day followin crenshaw's tutorial 
14:11:51 <davazp> I chose assembly to implement my (toy) Forth, but
14:12:07 <truefx> but this is the first time i learn a stack language
14:12:14 <davazp> now I want to replace the only file (forth.S) by a Forth one
14:12:21 <truefx> mostly i can follow the  text easily
14:12:34 <davazp> I wrote a little x86 assembler in Forth, so I hope to get bootstrapping before the year ends
14:13:09 <davazp> truefx: it works on the metal, without OS, that's nice :-)
14:13:58 <truefx> i was thinking of running my language on baremetal
14:14:06 <truefx> do you know it ? 
14:14:08 <davazp> you really feel that you can build something useful from a piece of metal!
14:14:32 <truefx> baremetal os which is written entirely in x64 assembly 
14:14:42 <davazp> truefx: good luck :-), a tip: test it on real hardware frequently
14:14:50 <truefx> monotask os for high performance computing
14:15:17 <davazp> I did not do it and when I tried, nothing worked
14:15:25 <truefx> what is your test platform ?
14:15:29 <davazp> it was so difficult to fix those bugs..
14:15:57 <truefx> and what kind of documents did you read ? 
14:16:22 <truefx> i cant find any detailed website about forth
14:16:54 <truefx> i was just looking at some chess engines and editors written in forth 
14:16:54 <davazp> qemu principally, often bochs and sometimes my machine
14:17:08 <davazp> qemu is specially convenient because it has support for multiboot kernels
14:17:36 <davazp> editors, :) I need one to do the bootstrapping practical in my Forth
14:17:57 <davazp> if you write one, please, share it!
14:18:00 <truefx> i plan to write something similar to vim too
14:18:02 <truefx> suuuuuure
14:18:08 <truefx> it will be vimlike
14:18:13 <truefx> do u use vim ?
14:18:25 <davazp> oh no, sorry, I am an emacs user :-)
14:18:43 <truefx> its not to late for an ide i think
14:18:59 <truefx> give me your old editor ill give you an ide
14:21:27 --- join: ASau`` (~user@95-26-89-189.broadband.corbina.ru) joined #forth
14:21:53 --- quit: ASau` (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
14:23:24 <davazp> forth is a good language for an extensible editor I think
14:27:18 <davazp> I gave up hacking my system when it was bootstrapped, but it would be nice that
14:27:47 <davazp> someone will go on having fun from it  :-)
14:47:56 --- join: karswell (~coat@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk) joined #forth
14:55:34 <ASau``> davazp: no, that's wrong.
14:55:42 <ASau``> Forth is bad choice for extensible editor
14:55:54 <davazp> ASau``: forth-like, stack-based language
14:56:13 <ASau``> Still no.
14:56:17 <davazp> I don't agree
14:57:02 <ASau``> You have to have first class continuations.
14:57:26 <ASau``> Otherwise you have problems with temporary editing tasks.
14:57:50 <ASau``> And once you recognize that, your language doesn't fit stacks.
14:57:50 <davazp> even though I use emacs, and I wrote quite emacs lisp code!  forth seems a good language for an editor
14:58:09 <davazp> not for something so big as emacs, of course, there you need a complete language
14:58:13 * ASau`` has wrote commercial code in Emacs Lisp.
14:59:09 <ASau``> Of course, Emacs has bigger problem than lack of continuations,
14:59:11 <davazp> but forth allows concise definitions, which are great for customization commands
14:59:13 <ASau``> still you need those.
14:59:28 <ASau``> Concise definitions are not the requirement.
15:00:10 <ASau``> Also, you can't make definitions simpler than task complexity,
15:00:15 <ASau``> or you have to cheat.
15:00:27 <ASau``> The latter raises language's complexity.
15:01:13 <ASau``> Anyway, once the first problem in Emacs Lisp is fixed,
15:01:38 <davazp> ASau``: of course, extensibility is not a requirement either,
15:01:41 <ASau``> and I've heard that it has been fixed recently, people start striving for continuations.
15:01:57 <ASau``> Extensibility _is_ the requirement.
15:02:18 <ASau``> Otherwise you can handle only pre-defined set of text types.
15:02:38 <davazp> ASau``: and it can be a perfectly valid target, of course
15:02:43 <ASau``> Sure.
15:02:55 <davazp> ASau``: you are too categorical in your statements, other alterantives can be used
15:02:58 <ASau``> Some people know nothing besides C and Forth. :)
15:03:10 <ASau``> What are your alternatives?
15:03:14 <ASau``> Forth?
15:03:19 <ASau``> No, Forth isn't.
15:03:27 <davazp> I can imagine a beautiful small recourses emacs-like clone, yet extensible
15:03:37 <davazp> in a stack-based language as something useful for me
15:03:49 <ASau``> Imagination breaks once you start doing that in code.
15:04:13 <ASau``> I know at least one example when people started with stack-based language.
15:04:15 <ASau``> Guess what?
15:04:28 <ASau``> They broke away soon.
15:04:38 <ASau``> See S-lang and JED.
15:05:16 <davazp> I don't know those particular _examples_,
15:05:27 <ASau``> That shows.
15:11:05 <ASau``> Imagination is nice, but ones don't build houses of sand.
15:13:25 --- quit: nighty- (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
15:14:04 <ASau``> (By the way, you should also understand that Forth isn't strictly speaking stack-oriented.)
15:14:44 <davazp> ASau``: ok, let me choose what I should understand :-)
15:14:45 <davazp>  
15:15:39 <davazp> as I said ASau``, for better or worse it is not math
15:15:59 <ASau``> What?
15:16:01 <davazp> where I like categorical statements. Some options are superior, sure, but
15:16:13 <ASau``> Oh, no.
15:16:42 <ASau``> You think that programming is somehow different from other engineering branches, do you?
15:17:20 <davazp> no, I don't really like participating in useless discussions 
15:17:25 <davazp> (this is only an exception)
15:17:56 <ASau``> Many people call discussion useless when losing argument. :)
15:19:07 <davazp> no, currently I call most discussions useless (out of mathematics, my field) when the other person tries to arise the opinion as an universal truth
15:19:17 <davazp> and it is not going everwhere
15:19:32 <ASau``> That's because there's no universal truth in mathematics since Hilbert.
15:19:38 <davazp> I did not think this as a discussion (it is not worth for me)
15:19:49 <ASau``> In science and engineering it is just the opposite.
15:20:00 <ASau``> When energy conserves, it is universal.
15:21:05 --- quit: tathi (Quit: leaving)
15:23:28 <ASau``> So far, the problem is that only few provided at least a concept of stack-based language used for extensible text editor,
15:23:34 <ASau``> the experiment failed.
15:24:34 <ASau``> And that wasn't even close to Forth in order to prove that Forth might be viable in such environment.
15:44:42 --- nick: ASau`` -> ASau
17:21:51 --- quit: davazp (Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs))
17:52:54 --- join: ttmrichter (~ttmrichte@61.184.205.206) joined #forth
18:10:55 --- quit: ttmrichter (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
18:25:40 --- join: ttmrichter (~ttmrichte@61.184.205.39) joined #forth
19:29:26 <truefx> what does $+ mean in forth ? 
19:30:00 <truefx> its not available in gforth but i ve come across an example using $+
20:09:18 --- join: jyfl987 (~jyf@114.242.114.131) joined #forth
20:31:11 --- join: nighty__ (~nighty@69-165-220-105.dsl.teksavvy.com) joined #forth
20:38:28 --- quit: jyfl987 (Quit: leaving)
21:10:23 --- quit: nighty__ (Quit: Lost terminal)
21:18:14 <ttmrichter> truefx: Where did you come across it?
21:18:35 <ttmrichter> It's not in pfe either, for what it's worth.
21:28:49 --- quit: Snoopy_1611 ()
22:39:01 --- quit: karswell (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
23:04:05 <ASau> It is string concatenation probably.
23:06:21 --- quit: ttmrichter (Quit: Leaving)
23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/11.12.19