00:00:00 --- log: started forth/16.09.08 00:01:29 nerfur: i forgot my password to all my main gmail account which i use for my phone and everything a month ago 00:01:54 its a good thing google never asks for it 00:01:59 i would be doomed 00:02:35 John[Lisbeth]: im not one of those people, but yeah 00:03:18 you mean you are not one of those people who is using crazy techniques or not one of the people that is constantly pushing and popping things? 00:03:33 crazy techniques 00:03:43 have you ever used forth? 00:04:02 No I am just now investigating reverse polish notation for the first time 00:04:11 just use it for a day or so, its not daunting or anything 00:04:29 It just helps me to learn to talk to people who understand it if you don't mind 00:05:20 John[Lisbeth], sorry, but do you understand that Forth is some sort of "between" asm and C, but you talk not about notation, but about languages and it is pretty confusing :) 00:05:41 extremely minimal and soemtimes even self-implemented for specific situation 00:06:44 It is inedeed close to assembly I mean you are litrally manpulating a stack with basically a tiny instruction set 00:06:51 and functions built on that tiny instruction set 00:07:06 and I assume you can use functional programming techniques to make your stack work like list processing 00:07:23 nerfur: well, notation is language 00:07:50 to a degree 00:08:41 notation as I understand it is just "where do I place this operator" 00:08:53 language is WAY more on top of it 00:08:59 music notation 00:09:03 my wording is more figurative and broad than yours I think 00:09:07 other notations 00:09:58 but nvm, I still can't understand that you try to get in this discussion, I still recommend to implement it in your favorite lisp dialect and see that disadvantages you find for yourself 00:10:11 although he isnt talking about music, so you have a point 00:10:35 What if I kill two birds with one stone and implement it in a postfix notation language so that I can teach myself post fix notation while I teach myself postfix notation 00:11:11 so you need to learn first new language and spend more time on your task ) 00:11:27 OMG 00:11:42 that's why I'm talking about lisp as I understand that you already pretty efficient with it 00:11:55 WHERE IS THE OPENING PARENTHESIS? :P 00:11:56 I actually only switched to lisp recently 00:12:54 John[Lisbeth]: your name seems familiar 00:12:55 in soviet Russia parenthesis opens you ) 00:12:59 are you in other channels? 00:13:03 yes lots 00:13:19 this is kind of irksome 00:13:22 morning 00:13:26 i am actually mentally disturbed 00:13:29 ( 00:13:34 morning 00:13:37 recently I've been in #emacs #lisp #lispcafe #manjaro and a few others 00:13:44 #tinycore 00:14:19 John[Lisbeth]: as others have said, it's easy to implement a postfix notation calculator 00:14:29 im just gonna leave these here so you can go and use any parenthesis you like ((((((((((( 00:14:42 prefix notation would work better because that's how we talk about arithmetic 00:14:51 I think if I implemented it I would do it in javascript because that is the easiest language I have ever used 00:14:58 but perhaps bash 00:15:09 so if you want a better intellectual challenge, write a prefix notation parser 00:15:16 John[Lisbeth]: can't see either of those being a great choice 00:15:25 John[Lisbeth]: I guess you can use Javascript from the command-line these days 00:15:50 bash is a bit of a nightmare to do the requisite parsing in 00:15:58 aha! thats where i've seen you, in #bash i think 00:16:21 John[Lisbeth]: I'd choose Python, but go with what you're familiar with 00:16:33 Yeah I used to hang out in #bash alot back before they got mad at me and threatened to ban me if I did not go learn haskell 00:16:55 and then the haskel guys started to get real fishy and keep assuming I was a former lisp programmer 00:17:17 so then about last winter I switched to lisp and learned emacs 00:18:14 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@180.183.115.141) joined #forth 00:18:14 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 00:18:56 and now in lisp I am going against the edges of what I can call progress and I am poking holes in this black box and one of those holes is postfix notation. And if I don't end up liking postfix notation I can plug up that hole 00:21:41 I don't get why Haskell is supposed to be good 00:21:58 Cause typechecking and optomizations 00:22:21 Let me phrase my thinking a different way 00:22:33 Forth is very easy to implement people say. Just a few lines of code in most languages. 00:22:46 Well not specifically fourth but postfix notation interpreters. 00:22:50 and these things are very fast 00:23:13 My thinking is that no matter what language I use I coudl just build a forth interpreter and start hacking away at it 00:23:49 but I am also curious about portability and modulatirty. Perhaps writing a postfix interpreter that can draw upon code others have written 00:24:33 you are talking about "source code converter" here, if I understand you right 00:25:00 something like that I suppose 00:25:03 or perhaps transpiling 00:25:16 or perhaps there is a postfix standard that many postfixers can agree on using 00:26:06 John[Lisbeth], lisp & forth have a lot of things in common in that their architectural drivers overlap significantly compared to other more recent (I hesistate to say modern) languages. 00:27:25 But generally, lisp adopts a more functional style of coding whereas forth is a concatenative style of coding. The subtle differences between the two are what make the way of thinking in both so different. 00:27:50 John[Lisbeth]: well the first thing if you want to get your head around postfix is to understand stacks 00:28:00 John[Lisbeth]: seriously, just go implement a simple 4-function RPN calculator 00:28:11 postfix, infix, prefix aren't standards. you either are or aren't. especially postfix. it is by far the simplest to evaluate. 00:28:35 you'll need something to accept a line of input, parse it out, stack any numbers and operate any operators 00:28:42 that's really all there is to it 00:29:03 John[Lisbeth]: it'll take you half an hour tops, maybe 40 minutes if you have to make a cup of tea first 00:30:03 any time you create a language it is a dangerous thing 00:31:11 I also think perhaps I should use a language with postfix notation before I implement it 00:31:26 no, just make a toy postfix calculator and play with it 00:31:40 it's more important to understand what's inside it 00:31:44 It seems very within my ability to do 00:32:28 Is this a good example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_Polish_notation#Postfix_algorithm 00:32:58 John[Lisbeth]: yes 00:33:12 although I wouldn't do so much error checking 00:33:26 the "if there is only one value in the stack" bit 00:33:30 simplify 00:33:41 can you implement it without having errors in the language? 00:33:51 if there are still things on the stack when you're done, leave them there for the next round 00:34:09 what do you mean "errors in the language"? 00:34:32 in the link I sent there are two parts of the algortihm which can produce an error behavior 00:34:52 yes 00:35:08 the first condition is definitely an error 00:35:18 there are not enough parameters 00:35:41 John[Lisbeth]: can you work out - in infix notation - what 2 + =? 00:35:59 two plus what, Gordon, you only have one parameter you dipshit 00:36:24 well = is taking 2 and + I think 00:36:57 lol, Gordon, relax, it is just harmless 2, it does nothing to you lets go find this *ker who didn't arrive! 00:36:58 similarly in postfix, 2 2 + gives me 4 00:37:07 John[Lisbeth]: buuuuuut 00:37:42 again in postfix 2 + 00:37:46 there must always be two 00:37:58 maybe ask the user for the necessary ones 00:38:08 John[Lisbeth]: no, just throw an error and reset the stack 00:38:11 it's the Forth way :-) 00:38:21 okie 00:38:25 I am gonna use dc 00:39:01 John[Lisbeth]: postfix is the exact opposite way round to how we talk about arithmetic 00:39:17 we use prefix notation 00:39:25 we sure as hell don't use infix notation, mentally 00:39:35 I have an invoice in front of me 00:40:17 cobol ftw: add 1 to 2 00:40:42 so I want the total, I say "add 10.67 for the brake seals, 5.00 for the slide pins, 5.00 for the grease, that's 20.67, multiply that by 1.2 to get price plus VAT" 00:40:45 nerfur: bingo 00:40:54 right, must leave, ttyl 00:45:47 is it save to say that a language like forth can calculate as fast as c? 00:48:23 yes and no 00:49:32 I ask this not because I am some speed junky who googled the fastest language but because I am coming from lisp and forth seems to have an advantage of speed over lisp in the regular style of lisp programming 00:50:52 not only is parsing postfix notation simpler computationally but apparently postfix is very close to assembler 00:52:36 yes but you're not parsing in real time 00:52:50 you compile to machine code first 00:53:02 so it doesnt matter 00:53:26 I am sort of hooked on the repl features 00:56:39 mmm rpn is closer, since you dont do the operator first, first you move to a register and then you call the operator (uhh was it?) 00:57:59 alirght, 4am bb, good luck 00:58:03 --- quit: nal (Quit: WeeChat 1.4) 01:08:19 --- join: dys (~dys@2003:5b:203b:100:6af7:28ff:fe06:801) joined #forth 01:17:06 --- quit: mnemnion (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 01:17:12 --- join: mnemnia (~mnemnion@71.198.73.193) joined #forth 01:52:17 --- quit: mnemnia (Remote host closed the connection) 01:53:25 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:5c47:5b16:47fa:788c) joined #forth 01:59:47 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 02:19:53 --- join: true-grue (~true-grue@176.14.223.200) joined #forth 02:22:37 --- quit: nighty (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) 02:28:54 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:cccc:4ba7:1db5:408f) joined #forth 02:32:59 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 02:55:32 --- quit: John[Lisbeth] (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 03:34:36 --- quit: true-grue (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 03:56:06 --- join: nighty (~nighty@sp49-106-211-251.msf.spmode.ne.jp) joined #forth 04:50:14 --- quit: proteusguy (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) 05:01:24 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:cccc:4ba7:1db5:408f) joined #forth 05:05:57 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 05:16:22 --- quit: nighty (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 05:17:27 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@183.89.213.124) joined #forth 05:17:27 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 06:04:57 --- join: true-grue (~true-grue@176.14.223.200) joined #forth 07:35:09 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:c569:24b4:aafc:65c1) joined #forth 07:39:21 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 07:56:12 --- join: nighty (~nighty@s229123.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp) joined #forth 08:11:57 --- join: nal (~nal@adsl-64-237-233-196.prtc.net) joined #forth 08:27:06 --- quit: nal (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) 08:31:58 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:2878:6384:3d35:a767) joined #forth 08:36:07 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 09:07:52 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 09:12:41 --- quit: dys (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 09:34:47 --- join: mnemnia (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 09:36:44 --- join: mnemnion_ (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 09:37:13 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 09:38:38 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 09:39:23 --- quit: mnemnia (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 09:40:38 --- join: mnemnia (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 09:41:07 --- quit: mnemnion_ (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 09:42:36 --- join: mnemnion_ (~mnemnion@71.198.73.193) joined #forth 09:43:17 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 09:44:57 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 09:45:01 --- quit: mnemnia (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 09:47:09 --- quit: mnemnion_ (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) 09:49:39 --- join: dys (~dys@ip-109-44-3-11.web.vodafone.de) joined #forth 11:05:34 Somewhere I remember reading about one of moore's forths that left out immediate words? Apparently it had some other way of doing that... something about compilation wordlists I think? I'd like to read more about that, anyone know where I might have read that? Googling "chuck moore forth without immediate words" didn't produce much that was relevant. 11:06:09 reepca`, cmFORTH. 11:06:20 --- nick: reepca` -> reepca 11:28:46 ah, thanks. Out of curiosity, is there a reason current forths don't seem to use the "separate compilation vocabularies and interpretation vocabularies" concept? Or do they, and I just haven't been looking in the right places? 11:31:09 --- join: Zarutian (~zarutian@168-110-22-46.fiber.hringdu.is) joined #forth 11:47:58 reepca: what, like using vocabulary to switch what set of words you're using? 11:49:39 I mean where when a word is looked up by EVALUATE in compile state it first searches the compilation vocabulary, then the interpretation vocabulary, and when it is looked up by EVALUATE in interpret state it only searches the interpretation vocabulary. 11:49:58 reepca, Sadly, most people only familiar with ANS systems. cmFORTH was made in 1987. But ANS is something based on the earlier Moore's systems, like polyFORTH. ANS guys are very conservative. 11:51:38 huh. The closest I've actually seen to a current system using that kind of idea is gforth's hybrid compile/interpret words that they use as a replacement for state-smart words, but then again, gforth is the only system I've tried. 11:56:28 I think in practice that would turn out to be more bother than it's worth 11:58:51 I was thinking it would be nice (or would it? Am I missing something?) to be able to use IF, for example, in both interpret and compile state and just have it behave like [IF] in interpret state. 12:00:40 There is no reason to make assumptions. cmFORTH code is public domain, just read it. 12:03:31 the problem with that is that I'm lazy and although I *should* practice reading and understanding code, I also *want* to get a quick answer so I can put it out of my mind for a bit and get homework done. I guess I'll take a quick look. 12:09:37 erm, any idea why the random backslashes in the middle of words here? https://github.com/ForthHub/cmFORTH/blob/combined/cmforth.fth 12:19:36 It's all in the text: "\ compiles a following compiler directive (that would normally be executed). Named [COMPILE] in FORTH-83." 12:23:19 oh. Woops. Also, what are POP and PUSH doing in there? Where does stuff get popped to / pushed from? 12:25:40 It's r> and >r. 12:25:56 oh, okay. 12:31:49 --- join: mnemnia (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 12:33:58 --- join: mnemnion_ (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 12:34:26 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 12:36:10 --- quit: mnemnia (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 12:39:09 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 12:39:12 --- quit: mnemnion_ (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 13:34:40 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 13:39:48 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 13:44:44 --- join: nal (~nal@adsl-64-237-235-68.prtc.net) joined #forth 13:45:58 --- join: nal1 (~nal@adsl-72-50-84-37.prtc.net) joined #forth 13:49:26 --- quit: nal (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) 14:08:57 --- quit: true-grue (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 14:38:18 --- join: MickyW (~MickyW@p4FE8C76D.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) joined #forth 14:42:23 reepca: here you can see cmFORTH with shadow blocks on the side: http://www.neverslow.com/forth/wiki.php/Forth/CMForthRtx2000 14:43:09 hmm 14:44:17 I wonder if I could keep the main context and a vocabulary context in totally different parts of memory 14:44:48 that way on a memory-constrained machines I could treat the vocabulary context like an overlay, swap in and out precompiled versions of it 14:46:33 speaking of vocabularies, I'm trying to implement dlyund's BIND word: 14:46:40 https://www.reddit.com/r/Forth/comments/4q2ue7/using_the_stack_instead_of_names_variables_does/d50jm3r?context=10000 14:46:54 ^ scroll down 14:49:42 He leverages the hyperstatic scoping and binds a word's previous context to current context to eliminate the need for traditional Forth vocabularies. 14:59:45 cool 15:04:12 --- join: ASau (~user@netbsd/developers/asau) joined #forth 15:06:47 I thought that if I save the link field of a word in the previous context and store that saved link field into LATEST when I want to BIND to that previous context gForth would search starting from there...but no. 15:08:01 Anyone know how to change the word where gForth starts searching from? 15:09:59 gordonjcp: Interesting idea. Perhaps your idea could also be implemented simply with the BIND word. 15:11:27 possibly 15:13:06 reepca: also check out "Metacompilation Made Easy" https://archive.org/stream/Forth_Dimension_Volume_12_Number_6#page/n29/mode/2up 15:14:18 "Demise of the metacompiler in cmForth" in sigforth 15:15:29 I would also recommend the book "Footsteps in an Empty Valley" by Dr. C.H. Ting. which explains cmForth in detail, but I have the 3rd to last copy. 15:21:35 gordonjcp: swapping in an overlay could change the behavior of a Forth vocabulary when utilizing BIND as well... such as making it run on a different platform. 15:22:24 hm 15:22:42 pointfree: but the point was to have (relatively) quick access to a precompiled library on disk 15:23:07 pointfree: although I guess if your "overlay" only contains native Forth code and not any assembler, then yes it would work 15:29:33 --- quit: Zarutian (Quit: Zarutian) 15:32:40 --- join: mnemnia (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 15:35:08 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 15:39:02 --- quit: mnemnia (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 15:40:59 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 15:45:24 --- join: gyxile (~nick@cpc80309-grim18-2-0-cust167.12-3.cable.virginm.net) joined #forth 15:50:08 gordonjcp: I think it would work for assembled words just as well because you're only manipulating the hyperstatic scoping. 15:51:50 I'm not really sure what that means 15:54:24 http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?HyperStaticGlobalEnvironment 16:00:47 --- quit: nighty (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 16:05:54 --- quit: gyxile (Quit: Ex-Chat) 16:06:00 pointfree: I'll read that in the morning :-) 16:06:10 --- quit: dys (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) 16:06:50 pointfree: it seems a bit heavy-duty for close to bedtime on a day that has involved ~250 miles of windy country roads in biblical rainstorms 16:16:06 hahas, sleep well gordonjcp sleep well :) 16:16:33 :-) 16:16:44 and at least I got the ISDN modem replaced 16:33:42 --- join: mnemnia (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 16:36:40 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 16:39:43 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 16:41:00 --- quit: mnemnia (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 16:44:53 What is a good way to handle transient data structures/objects in forth? Should I use a malloc-like allocate/resize/free system like in gforth? I'm implementing Stuart Cheshire's Consistent Overhead Byte Stuffing method to convert data into a format that can be sent over the wire with reserved bytes (nulls in my case) used as packet delimiters, and I'm putting the result in the dictionary. 16:45:45 --- quit: MickyW (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 16:48:43 So you'd put an address to some memory and a byte count on the stack, execute my word, and you get a result on the dictionary, which you can send over the wire (somehow) and then discard. What if I want to do other stuff that puts things on the dictionary in the meantime? There has to be a better way! 16:49:15 I could do what gforth does with strings, and allocate from the heap. That's how I'm getting my test input anyway. 17:05:12 gracana: that's a difficult problem, and it most likely involves moving memory around. The problem is that the dictionary is used like a stack, but is missing anything but DROP and DUP (sort of). So naturally it's difficult to put stuff on there in the right order. Further complicating matters is that words in the dictionary are assumed to be a linked list, so moving word headers around can break stuff. 17:08:15 There's especially little you can do if you limit yourself to portable code :/ 17:12:10 Gracana, reepca: Had this same problem with ForthFS: http://slides.com/andreaswagner-1/forthfs#/ ...at SV-FIG James Bowman asked how I would solve it. 17:12:57 I'm not too worried about it being portable, I just wondered what strategies people use. DPANS94 allocate/free/resize seem pretty portable, actually. 17:13:07 I don't want to use complicated B-trees or other intricate data structures on a microcontroller... 17:13:24 So I started working on a sparse forth. 17:15:15 It's based around Sparse Distributed Representations with Context Dependent Thinning ( for structure and function composition). 17:15:27 http://odroid.0xffffffff.in/~deploy/Rachkovskij%20Kussul%20Baidyk%20Building%20a%20world%20model%20with%20structure-sensitive%20sparse%20binary%20distributed%20representations%20BICA%202013%203%2064-86.pdf 17:16:13 Problem is the SIMD operations are rather slow on conventional architectures. 17:16:31 pointfree: how do I use this website? There must be a button I can push repeatedly to see all the slides in order, but I haven't found it. 17:16:47 try space 17:17:30 Gracana: click on one of the slides. 17:17:44 Space just goes through the top level. I will click. 17:17:49 pointfree: yeow 17:18:12 nah clicking does nothing 17:18:26 and the pictures are missing :X 17:19:44 I found your darcs repo 17:19:56 > Mount your microcontroller's memory regions as a 9p synthetic filesystem on your big computer running Linux with v9fs in the kernel. 17:20:01 that is pretty darn cool 17:20:11 Be aware it's not the latest copy... 17:23:05 Thanks Gracana! 17:26:41 Did you try the right-left-up-down arrow keys? 17:27:05 yeah that worked but the slides seemed to be missing content 17:27:13 hm 17:29:29 --- join: nighty (~nighty@d246113.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp) joined #forth 17:55:41 --- join: neceve (~ncv@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 18:32:32 --- join: mnemnia (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 18:34:58 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 18:45:31 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 18:47:06 --- quit: mnemnia (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 18:48:47 --- join: mnemnia (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 18:50:45 --- join: mnemnion_ (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 18:51:00 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 18:52:27 --- quit: mnemnion_ (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 18:53:00 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:f513:cc13:167a:978a) joined #forth 18:53:10 --- quit: mnemnia (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 19:06:10 --- quit: nal1 (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 19:10:42 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 19:33:06 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:792d:8a4b:1d20:ffcf) joined #forth 19:37:22 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 20:17:37 --- join: groovy2shoes (~groovy2sh@unaffiliated/groovebot) joined #forth 20:19:22 --- quit: proteusguy (Remote host closed the connection) 20:30:21 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:1505:e668:4ec9:acec) joined #forth 20:34:34 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 20:56:08 --- quit: neceve (Quit: Konversation terminated!) 21:31:11 --- join: nal1 (~nal@adsl-72-50-84-37.prtc.net) joined #forth 21:31:56 i was wondering if forth could be use to build a amazon lambda like service 21:35:19 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:e8e7:f96e:84a2:56ac) joined #forth 21:39:34 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 21:58:41 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:e8e7:f96e:84a2:56ac) joined #forth 22:09:36 --- join: lambda-11235 (~lambda-11@184.63.207.209) joined #forth 22:11:43 Can gforth be used to compile forth to assembly? 22:26:46 --- join: John[Lisbeth] (~user@13.85.69.102) joined #forth 22:27:11 I have done some research on postfix notation 22:27:35 I want a forth implementation that is written in a single minimal binary 22:38:51 John[Lisbeth]: then go get it boy 22:38:53 fetch! 22:42:51 heres a list John[Lisbeth] http://forth.org/compilers.html 22:49:14 lambda-11235: isnt the entire point of forth is to avoid assembly? 22:51:27 however, this might be a good idea... but you kind of always depend on the vm, so it might be hard to do 23:04:16 nal1: I was under the impression that the point of forth was to be a simple stack based language. 23:10:51 hey i asked you 23:30:44 --- quit: lambda-11235 (Quit: Bye) 23:34:01 --- join: dys (~dys@ip-109-44-3-11.web.vodafone.de) joined #forth 23:36:29 the reason I want to use forth is to run inside of a container 23:36:44 and I want to have a very minimal forth 23:45:26 --- quit: karswell (Remote host closed the connection) 23:46:24 --- join: karswell (~user@216.18.189.80.dyn.plus.net) joined #forth 23:46:51 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 23:47:04 how minimal? 23:50:52 John[Lisbeth]: have you seen jonesforth? 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/16.09.08