00:00:00 --- log: started forth/12.02.24 00:11:16 --- join: ttmrichter (~ttmrichte@221.234.38.23) joined #forth 00:11:16 --- mode: ChanServ set +v ttmrichter 01:59:29 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 01:59:29 --- mode: ChanServ set +v MayDaniel 04:53:19 --- quit: MayDaniel (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 05:02:13 --- quit: haole_ (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88 [Firefox 10.0/20120204180658]) 07:59:37 --- join: hlavaty (~user@91-65-218-223-dynip.superkabel.de) joined #forth 07:59:37 --- mode: ChanServ set +v hlavaty 08:10:12 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 08:10:12 --- mode: ChanServ set +v MayDaniel 08:17:45 --- join: Kumul (~Kumul@67.224.230.59) joined #forth 08:17:57 --- mode: ChanServ set +v Kumul 08:29:37 --- quit: MayDaniel (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) 08:35:25 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 08:35:25 --- mode: ChanServ set +v MayDaniel 08:45:16 --- quit: ttmrichter (Quit: Leaving) 09:04:18 --- quit: MayDaniel (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 09:15:15 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 09:15:15 --- mode: ChanServ set +v MayDaniel 09:19:43 how'd I go about "connecting" two cells, such that a store to the first one affects the second one accordingly? (e.g., stores the same value into it) 09:20:06 is redefining ! the way to go?, or can you guys think of something else? 09:24:28 or providing a custom word, rather. in order to leave ! as it is, I guess 09:28:37 The latter. 09:29:11 Redefining such fundamental words as "!" has too far-going consequences. 09:29:25 agreed 09:29:44 If you are really going to redefine "!", you don't ask such questions. 10:01:54 DGASAU: http://ideone.com/sbbr1 <- something like that? 10:05:49 I'd rather use records directly than simulating them. 10:05:53 * DGASAU shrugs. 10:06:26 forth doesn't have records, does it? 10:07:02 There're at least two commonly used implementations. 10:07:26 Also, I don't know what you're doing, but I suspect you're doing it wrong. 10:07:35 :-) 10:08:20 If you want to implement observers, you'd rather do it more idiomatically. 10:08:38 I'm trying to make a small DSL for (primitive) logic-circuit simulation 10:09:21 Do you understand how you do it in OO fasion? 10:10:34 I understand the idea, yes. haven't implemented it yet, though 10:12:16 It is probably better to take well-researched way than start inventing your own. 10:12:54 Alternatively, if you prefer FRP you can implement it that way. 10:24:47 --- quit: MayDaniel (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 10:26:09 I'll take a look into FRP. thanks so far 10:31:05 --- quit: hlavaty (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 11:48:50 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 11:48:50 --- mode: ChanServ set +v MayDaniel 11:55:04 --- quit: angstrom (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) 11:55:38 --- join: angstrom (~Unknown@unaffiliated/angstrom) joined #forth 11:55:38 --- mode: ChanServ set +v angstrom 13:41:36 --- quit: MayDaniel (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 14:03:09 --- join: I440r (~zhiming@24-183-5-217.dhcp.fdul.wi.charter.com) joined #forth 14:03:10 --- mode: ChanServ set +v I440r 19:24:17 --- join: kandinski (~kandinski@hiperactivo.com) joined #forth 19:24:17 --- mode: ChanServ set +v kandinski 20:13:39 --- quit: I440r (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 20:18:52 --- join: I440r (~zhiming@24-183-5-217.dhcp.fdul.wi.charter.com) joined #forth 20:18:52 --- mode: ChanServ set +v I440r 20:39:55 --- join: ttmrichter (~ttmrichte@221.234.38.23) joined #forth 20:39:55 --- mode: ChanServ set +v ttmrichter 21:11:04 --- quit: ttmrichter (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 21:15:52 --- join: ttmrichter (~ttmrichte@113.106.101.45) joined #forth 21:15:53 --- mode: ChanServ set +v ttmrichter 22:05:50 --- quit: nighty^ (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 22:07:14 --- quit: Kumul (Quit: gone) 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/12.02.24