00:00:00 --- log: started forth/17.01.26 00:08:33 --- quit: circ-user-GhxZZ (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 00:52:39 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 01:08:23 I want to write a mini OS, which boostraps Forth. Where should I start with the Forth part? I'm thinking jonesforth might be a good start 01:09:13 here -> http://www.forthos.org/ 01:23:51 nerfur: thanks 01:28:20 nerfur: it's not open-source, right? 01:28:29 I mean, what can I learn from it then? 01:37:57 --- join: wa5qjh (~Thunderbi@121.54.90.133) joined #forth 02:04:20 --- quit: nighty (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 02:21:57 --- quit: karswell` (Write error: Broken pipe) 02:23:47 --- quit: dograt (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) 02:24:19 --- join: dograt (~dograt@unaffiliated/dograt) joined #forth 02:28:40 --- join: dual (~bonafide@cpe-74-75-153-119.maine.res.rr.com) joined #forth 02:42:38 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:a4b2:9bda:90e8:a01) joined #forth 02:46:57 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 03:03:15 --- join: nighty (~nighty@s229123.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp) joined #forth 03:08:02 z0d, it is open source but the source is inside the image. 03:08:44 --- quit: proteusguy (Remote host closed the connection) 03:14:44 oh, okay. thx 03:28:25 yeah, it is open source, and somewhere on site you also can find forth "block" with code without booting OS 03:30:53 I'm also heard that eforth is very portable 03:31:13 and many other forths take their roots in it 03:37:01 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:d562:70d5:d123:4d93) joined #forth 03:41:24 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 04:55:00 --- quit: wa5qjh (Remote host closed the connection) 05:35:13 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:dda3:176a:291d:59b6) joined #forth 05:39:45 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 05:41:47 --- join: vsg1990 (~yaaic@2607:fb90:2983:8653:189:620:68c:b944) joined #forth 05:57:11 --- quit: phadthai (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 06:13:34 --- quit: vsg1990 (Quit: Yaaic - Yet another Android IRC client - http://www.yaaic.org) 06:15:17 --- quit: nighty (Remote host closed the connection) 06:17:02 --- join: nighty (~nighty@s229123.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp) joined #forth 06:22:11 zy]x[yz: DragonForth cross-compiled from NT to PalmOS. 06:22:32 Essentially SP-Forth does (almost) cross-compilation too. 06:31:29 There is no specific features in Forth which help to do cross compilation. It's more a matter of careful design of Forth engine, selection of base primitives etc. And eForth is better here than most other Forths. 06:39:45 I'd say there're no specific features in Forth which help to do anything, compilation and cross-compilation included. 06:49:06 :) 06:50:49 --- join: proteusguy (~proteus-g@180.183.40.128) joined #forth 06:50:49 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 06:58:22 why are you telling me this? 07:07:14 --- quit: proteusguy (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) 08:00:44 --- join: circ-user-GhxZZ (~circuser-@2602:304:4159:4770:7c99:5552:d5e9:46b7) joined #forth 08:06:30 --- quit: circ-user-GhxZZ (Remote host closed the connection) 08:19:19 --- join: circ-user-ZCCmR (~circuser-@2602:304:4159:4770:f80b:8414:46ce:7c6c) joined #forth 08:35:45 --- join: GeDaMo (~GeDaMo@212.225.112.221) joined #forth 08:36:27 z0d: exchanging files: http://www.forthos.org/utils/ http://www.forthos.org/news/questions/0068.html 08:36:27 Also, a newer version of ForthOS that contains TCP/IP support and more: http://www.forthos.org/pickup/ 08:36:27 Run ForthOS in qemu like so: 08:36:27 qemu-img create -f raw forthos.raw 2G 08:36:27 sudo mount forthos.iso /media/iso 08:36:28 dd bs=4k skip=1 seek=1 if=/media/iso/ForthOS1 of=forthos.raw 08:36:28 dd bs=4k seek=100 if=/media/iso/ForthOS2 of=forthos.raw 08:36:29 dd bs=4k seek=10000 if=/media/iso/SrcFS10000 of=forthos.raw 08:36:29 qemu-img convert forthos.raw -O qcow forthos.qcow 08:36:30 qemu -hda forthos.qcow -cdrom forthos.iso -boot d 08:37:19 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:dad:aca1:ee44:8406) joined #forth 08:39:21 pointfree: thanks 08:41:32 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 08:42:26 --- quit: circ-user-ZCCmR (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 08:44:19 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:dad:aca1:ee44:8406) joined #forth 09:07:58 --- join: proteusguy (~proteus-g@2405:9800:b400:495c:4eed:deff:fe9f:7678) joined #forth 09:07:59 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 09:16:56 --- join: ricky_ricardo (~rickyrica@2602:306:328f:79f0:3842:ad19:d795:cc69) joined #forth 09:17:43 --- join: neceve (~ncv@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 09:26:59 --- quit: ricky_ricardo (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 09:35:21 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 09:53:57 --- quit: impomatic (Remote host closed the connection) 09:56:56 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@104.6.70.118) joined #forth 09:57:08 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 09:57:21 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@104.6.70.118) joined #forth 10:09:15 --- join: Zarutian (~zarutian@168-110-22-46.fiber.hringdu.is) joined #forth 10:09:32 --- quit: Zarutian (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 10:11:18 --- join: Zarutian (~zarutian@168-110-22-46.fiber.hringdu.is) joined #forth 10:14:46 --- join: boinkboink (~clarsen@unaffiliated/boinkboink) joined #forth 10:40:15 --- join: phadthai (mmondor@ginseng.pulsar-zone.net) joined #forth 11:06:12 --- join: mark4 (~mark4@138-229-170-157.dhcp.ftwo.tx.charter.com) joined #forth 12:02:50 say, isnt the HLD variable (used by HOLD) pointing to somewhere else than just 0x0 ? 12:07:50 never mind found out the issue 12:32:28 you set it 12:32:39 its a good question tho hang on 12:33:08 <# sets hld pointing to pad plus some distance 12:33:27 or maybe just pad, depending on what forth you are using 12:33:35 pad is USUALLY 80 bytes above "here" 12:33:44 so no numbers bigger than 79 characters :) 12:33:56 : <# pad hld ! ; for example in isforth 12:34:05 or you can do 12:34:11 create buffer 30 allot 12:34:28 : foo buffer 30 + hld ! ; 12:34:43 I am using an variant of eForth but on dual stackmachine architecture 12:34:57 every # digit you convert or 'x' hold character you hold writes the character to where HLD points and then decrements HLD 12:35:30 do you understand <# # and #> and hold etec? 12:35:34 yebb 12:35:38 kk 12:39:48 only 12 instructions + calling implemented in hardware ( EXIT >R R> DOLIT DUP DROP SWAP AND XOR LeftBitRotate @ ! are the instructions btw) 12:42:52 DOLIT suggests a 79 standard or FIG implementation 12:43:26 shifts i call << and >> not the stupid ans "complete sentences to describe function" names 12:43:34 and I am even thinking about swapping out DOLIT and have DOLIT_1 instead, same with LeftBitRotate and 1_LeftBitRotate as these make the hardware implementation of the machine. 12:43:35 (lit) is more modern 12:44:14 i.e. have a version of the rotate that takes a parameter and one that implies a shift of 1 bit? 12:44:30 and use the N rotate left to impliment right shifts? 12:44:38 well << is not equiv to LBR (have seen it called that in some assemblers) as it doesnt take the first bit(s) and put them|it at the end 12:44:58 right its a shift not a bit rotation 12:45:29 dup $c and 2 >> swap $3 and 2 << or 12:45:30 heh 12:45:34 but yeah I basically took eForth and translated it from that x86 assembler to the assembler I am using 12:45:38 a rotate would make that less verbose 12:46:24 eForth is based eather on 79 or FIGFORTH but I am slowly incorporating words and concepts from other more modern forths 12:47:04 I choose eForth as it had very minimalistic set of CODE words 12:47:05 was never impressed with eforth 12:47:21 eh, the e stands for education 12:47:22 but im rarely impressed with other peoples forths lol - tho i DID like tom zimmers FPC a lot 12:47:34 it served that purpose well 12:47:46 but its cloded in a purely clusterfuck scatterbrained way 12:47:55 not cleanly layed out or presented 12:47:58 FPC? 12:48:05 a dos forth by tom zimmer 12:48:23 he also started win32forth before abandoning forth forever 12:48:28 yeah, and I also read jonesforth through 12:48:44 he is also the guy that implemented the forth for the C64 and VIC20 12:48:50 jonesforth is UTTER fucking garbage 12:48:57 ^ seconded 12:49:05 it was my first exposure to forth and I regret it 12:49:07 and i think he took a significant amount of his code out of my sources 12:49:24 it shows that jonesforth is crappy 12:49:48 yet everyone knows jonesforth and nobody knows my forths lol 12:49:51 bah 12:49:53 humbug!!!!!!!!! 12:49:54 lol 12:50:02 mark4: isforth right? 12:50:05 not any more 12:50:08 i renamed 12:50:11 x4 12:50:24 right, another name hard to google for ;-Þ 12:50:35 i renamed it to x4 because i wanted to release IT and the thumb2 version of it on github 12:50:40 i have x4 and t4 12:50:53 and am working on n4 (android ndk version) 12:51:00 thumb2? I take it is targetting ARMv6 or later? 12:51:03 wouldnt mind implementing a64 and x64 12:51:16 armv6 or possibly armv7 12:51:27 im not sure if im using v7 opcodes in there or not tho its possible 12:51:40 its on my github 12:51:54 https://github.com/mark4th 12:52:35 if i get work my next project will be to get a PI3 and implement a 64 bit arm version 12:52:37 well, I am doing this forth of mine to target a small vm spec that has very little room for confusion regarding how to implement 12:52:43 maybe A64 or T64 12:53:00 oh yea. i have both A4 (pure arm 32) and T4 (thumb2) but im not releasing A4 12:54:25 --- join: ACE_Recliner (~ACE_Recli@c-50-165-178-74.hsd1.in.comcast.net) joined #forth 12:54:54 I am doing this a) dont like software whose platforms go away on whim and b) I dont like those brittle 'dev-env' that most software assumes for building. 12:56:58 i wrote isforth for a few reasons. 1) there were at that time NO (repeat Z E R O) real forths for linux 12:57:04 anything written in C is NOT forth. period 12:57:26 i wanted a forth that any idiot could understand. i wrote my code specifically so that anyone could read it 12:57:30 a clear case of b) is the recent PIE|PIC fuckup with gcc 12:57:49 ive had people who dont code forth OR assembler tell me they can read and understand my forths 12:58:08 i HATE everything about every GNU development tool 12:58:20 they are the single worst tools i have ever been forced to use. 12:59:13 well, I have seen worse like from Microchip. XPLAB is one such. Requires a spefic version of jvm) 12:59:23 microchip is based on gcc 12:59:38 I am talking about their "IDE" 12:59:46 and PIC controllers are pure, unadulterated garbage 12:59:58 i.e. google "skid bucket" for why 13:00:00 yes 13:00:04 i am familiar with it 13:00:24 develop code using it and the instant you go above 8k of object code your coding becomes like tuning a guitar 13:00:27 they maybe made sense when feature size was 2 µm or so but not now 13:00:37 tune the B string up a bit and... every other string detunes 13:01:04 if you have a need for a device that has no more than 1k of code space and no more than 4 pins... PIC is absolutely the way to go 13:01:17 anything higher up than that and AVR is your only good choice 13:01:19 unfortunately 13:01:25 microchip bought them :( 13:01:53 a guy I know basically wrote an Augmented Finate StateMachine translator to PIC assembler. Pretty good for that. 13:01:56 what? atmel got bought? 13:02:42 yeah, by microchip 13:02:59 but yeah the PIC8, PIC12 and PIC16 are rather crappy. PIC32 is niceish because it is basically an MIPS32 13:03:08 PIC32 is mips 13:03:13 not microcrap 13:03:26 every microcontroller vendor I buy from gets bought out 13:03:52 hey microchip! can i haz a job plzkthxbai? i codez good! honest!(tm) 13:04:12 microchip is now a mega corporation in the embedded field 13:04:29 how did they do it? by producing UTTER FUCKING GARBAGE, charging almost nothing for it and.... 13:04:32 zy]x[yz: I have been in Pick'n'place pcb manifacturing and there is basically an website to keep track of who bought who or which division split back off etc. 13:04:41 having the single greatest sales and support team ever put on the face of the planet 13:06:41 hmm.. could they be convinced to make chips with their plethora of periphilars but using something like RISCV core or, angels allow, some dual stach machine from the New Wave book? 13:07:00 well there you have it, cheap and good sales and support team 13:07:02 wish github gave me stats on how many people viewed my sources or downloaded them lol 13:07:16 --- quit: GeDaMo (Remote host closed the connection) 13:07:30 cheap garbage. good sales and support 13:07:38 not cheap goodness. 13:08:00 well, would you say AVR architecture is garbage? 13:08:08 is it just me or does anyone else here think that "cybercoders" is a scam site? 13:08:24 no. avr is perfect 13:08:29 no skid buckets needed there 13:08:34 just from the name, it sounds scam sites 13:08:54 they are like monster.com and dice.com etc 13:09:06 but if it looks like 80'ish or TRONish then it might be tongue in cheek name 13:09:38 wish people would stop listing firmware jobs for doing FPGA work. thats HARDWARE not software grrr 13:09:55 no they are a big name in the job search industry 13:10:12 * Zarutian is trying to think of an device card for netrunner bearing the name "cybercoder" 13:10:48 I would say it is both HARDWARE and SOFTWARE job. 13:11:01 oh, sorry misread 13:11:03 cybercoders is a staffing agency, isn't it? 13:11:15 omg google went from indexing 5 of my sites pages to 4 to 3 to 5 to 30 of 37 lolk 13:11:44 I have to wonder, would someone who does both software and hardware development just be called a "ware developer"? 13:11:59 were-developer 13:12:01 (not to be confused with the weredeveloper) 13:12:13 nice 13:12:22 star-ware developer (if he or she does firmware and wetware too) 13:13:13 systems developer :P 13:14:12 I met such people, and they sometimes dont like when I point out issues of manifacturability, sourcing and mantenability issues in their designs 13:16:13 go look at my code. if you have anything to say about it that is critical of it i always listen. i dont always change my code tho :) 13:16:32 but if you bury your head in the sand your going to produce garbage 13:17:14 often the code is not the issue, but the board layout, huge BOMs were only one of each component is used on each board and mechanical mounting. 13:19:58 ever seen an PCB stress fracture because the mounting screw holes were not quite in the right spot and the casing is expected to go through thermal expansion/contraction? 13:21:25 fun stuff like that. 13:21:34 lol 13:21:39 thats a mechanical engineering issue 13:22:10 both mechanical engineering and electronic engineering are beyond me 13:22:17 i still didnt perfect software engineering yet! 13:22:20 or the case when an timing crystal vibrated itself loose because it hit on motor vibration harmonics? 13:23:16 you think you can anticipate that prior to first run? 13:23:31 no still fun to mention 13:24:13 k lol 13:24:15 just checkin 13:24:29 and this is why designs only go for like 20 pieces run for the first few iterations 13:24:43 and even that is expensive 13:25:32 depends, you can get two layer boards or even four layer boards etched pretty cheap 13:26:20 (in the four layer case the middle two layers are just ground plane and power plane) 13:26:21 etching is only part of it - then thers stuffing and programming and testing of each itteration 13:26:50 yebb and damn time consuming too 13:27:21 time is money 13:27:42 this is why some companies go for high modularity and iterate each module slowly 13:28:18 modularity also helps with mantenance as you can just swap out the buggy module 13:28:40 anyone who does not use modularity where they can are dumb 13:29:19 its like forth - create one primited. test it. 13:29:28 yay that module works 13:30:01 tho you cant always modularise your hardware 13:30:04 heck I have seen boards that are basically amalgam of module boards but the silkscreen has 'saw here' dotted lines between them. 13:30:53 those can be fun :) 13:31:17 it shows a potentially better design if the modules dont interfere with each other 13:32:07 every time a train goes by here the ENTIRE building shakes 13:32:13 I suspect that they got cheaper deal from the pcb manifacturer this way. 13:32:18 its like a freeking earthquake every few minutes 13:32:30 mark4: where is that? 13:32:31 if we had an actual earthquake here we probably wouldnt notice it 13:32:37 im in fort worth tx 13:32:52 thers a freight train line less than 100 yards away 13:33:00 oh, fun 13:33:07 they stop running at 3am :) 13:33:32 weird thing is not every train causes an earthquake. must be a resonance thing 13:33:57 i wonder if it would be possible to mechanically randomize a buildings resonant frequency! 13:34:31 --- quit: ACE_Recliner (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 13:34:33 look into design principles behind japanese temples iirc 13:34:59 ive seen that 13:35:06 btw I have lived in an place where small earth quakes are frequentish 13:35:13 that doesnt change their resonant frequency it suspends the entire building :) 13:35:33 big pole in center of building, hang building on pole 13:35:41 awesome engineering 13:35:44 there not only that 13:35:56 there is* 13:37:04 the Shinjunku temple has to deal with the same building resonance issue as you are having because below it is an huge underground trainstation iirc. 13:37:24 --- join: ACE_Recliner (~ACE_Recli@c-50-165-178-74.hsd1.in.comcast.net) joined #forth 13:38:43 the fun thing is that that temple is rebuilt every fifty years, something to do with change|flow, impermanence and yet persistance 13:39:20 "When you cross an river, is it the same one?" kind of deal I think. 13:39:31 i love japanese carpentry 13:39:45 they THOUGHT about the problem much deeper than western carpenters 13:39:54 even their saw design is superior 13:40:08 cut on the pull (expansion) not push (compression) 13:40:15 makes their cuts MUCH more accurate 13:40:33 tension/compression even 13:42:04 might have something to do with bottom up view many asian countries are|were known for instead of the usual wester top down one. 13:42:23 I hold forth the opinion that you must do both when designing stuff. 13:42:45 no top down design, bottom up coding 13:43:00 dont think of the minute details while designing, refine the lower level details in the design 13:43:29 go from general to particular in your design. built it from particular to general when coding 13:43:53 and iterate through these steps again and again? 13:44:10 if while doing your top down design you see something that falls under "particular" put it into the design when you get that far :) 13:44:16 laways 13:44:18 always 13:44:30 you CANT forsee everything at design stage OR at implementation stage 13:45:10 if you set your design in stone and REFUSE to modify it during the implementation stage you make implementation impossible 13:46:01 yeah, seen that failure many times 13:46:03 there must always be a path back into the design spec during implementation or you fuck yourself AND the developers and more importantly, the end user 13:46:38 also. marketing should NEVER be in charge of specs 13:46:40 not ever 13:46:59 they should be in charge of compiling a list of potential specs and engineers should then write the spec 13:47:09 there shoulnt even be a "marketing spec" 13:47:35 when marketing drives design and implementation you produce garbage every time 13:47:37 i hate that shit 13:48:05 the marketing department has NO CLUE about engineering. 13:49:19 benjamin frankin had somewhat to say bout this :) 13:49:20 Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread. 13:49:22 they basically promise rainbows and unicorns? 13:49:57 marketing departments are all hot air. they will tell the customer anything to get a sale 13:49:58 aah, didnt know that quote. I wonder what he thinks of distributed governance 13:50:09 http://solon.x10host.com/affidavit/bar.php 13:50:17 it was in reference to distributed government 13:50:31 thats a page from my book, look down the page for the FULl quote 13:50:39 mark4: I have actually caused a whole marketeering team to be fired because what they sold the customer was impossible. 13:51:00 But it is not by the consolidation, or concentration of powers, but by their distribution, that good government is effected. 13:52:40 same in computer processing. distributed computing is MUCH more powerful 13:52:56 not as simple as putting one dictator in charge of everything but now you need a dictator who KNOWS everything 13:53:07 he didnt come back yet. were still waiting, patiently! 13:53:07 mark4: the customer later got a much better and possible solution for their problem. They got discount which otherwise would have gone to marketeering. 13:53:17 lol 13:53:31 NEVER pay your marketing department a commission for a sale 13:53:38 you drive them to do anything to get that sale 13:53:47 and marketing is inherently a dishonest profession 13:54:34 --- quit: neceve (Quit: Konversation terminated!) 13:54:59 --- join: neceve (~ncv@79.114.19.228) joined #forth 13:54:59 --- quit: neceve (Changing host) 13:54:59 --- join: neceve (~ncv@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 13:55:05 you missunderstood me. There wasnt any commission. Just the cost of running that department|team was taken out because they had been fired 13:55:18 oh i see :) 13:55:57 a marketing department should be in charge of MARKET RESEARCH which should be used by engineers to implement design specs. 13:56:05 not a marketing spec -> design spec however 13:56:36 the marketing department should then focus its efforts on selling that which the ENGINEERING TEAM developed 13:56:48 any time marketing has ANY say in design... your fucked 13:58:42 that explains quite a few things I have seen in the world 13:59:41 30 years of experience with watching marketing departments turn a 2 week job into a 3 year nightmare 14:00:52 can you give an example of how they fucked up? 14:01:39 not specifics but in general, any time a marketing department is making design decisions you are screwed 14:01:54 a marketing department does market research on what the customer wants and needs 14:02:02 the ENGINEER knows how to turn that into a product 14:02:13 marketing wankers dont know the first thing about engineering 14:02:19 so should NEVER drive engineering 14:02:26 yet... almost always.. they do 14:03:30 and why do you think that is? 14:03:54 thats a good question, i have no freeking idea 14:04:05 internal corporate politics 14:05:03 tells me that there is something wrong with how corporations are usually structured then. 14:05:16 ya dont say! lol 14:05:32 In a shocking twist, marketing people are good at making higher-ups think what the marketing people want them to think 14:05:43 tada! 14:06:06 most corporations are basically hierchial when they go over certain size threashold 14:06:34 it falls under division of responsibility. a distributed system 14:07:01 problem is when module a) who knows nothing about module b) or its job... is in charge of module b) 14:08:04 what would module a) be in this? management or? 14:08:23 marketing dep 14:08:40 with b = engineering 14:08:57 --- quit: ACE_Recliner (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) 14:10:05 it used to be that there was basically the job of managers not allowing such to happen. 14:10:36 btw what is this bar corporation? 14:10:36 management knows neither marketing nor engineering 14:10:39 --- join: ACE_Recliner (~ACE_Recli@c-50-165-178-74.hsd1.in.comcast.net) joined #forth 14:11:01 the bar association is a private, unregistered, untaxed, unregulated CORPORATION 14:11:31 what country are you from btw? 14:11:32 mark4: depends on how management came to be. If you promoted from within each department or just gotten from outside with MBA degrees. 14:12:00 ya well. marketing managers should be put in charge of managing marketing not engineering :P 14:12:01 Iceland where there is no such corporation as any such would be forcefully disbanded 14:12:15 you dont have a bar association? 14:12:27 is iceland a constitutional republic or a democracy? 14:12:47 there is Lögfræðingafélagið but that is more of an trade|union kind of thing. 14:13:00 the latter 14:13:27 and it is based on civil law principles not common laws ones, iirc 14:13:32 then you are a sovereign in your own right. you are not subject to any code, rule, regulation, ordinance or statute without your individual, knowingly intelligent consent. 14:13:44 civil law is a fiction there is no such thing 14:14:01 http://solon.x10host.com/affidavit/republic.php 14:14:07 read that chapter and the following one, 14:14:26 well, 'civil law' and 'common law' are two diffrent ways to base an corpus of laws on iirc. 14:14:28 it will explain the (ONLY!!!) difference between a democracy and a republic 14:14:37 I thought in a democracy you weren't subject without the majority's consent (your consent being optional)? 14:14:38 no. civil law is statutory. 14:14:48 as my book says, statutes can be repealed. LAW can not 14:15:10 no. in a democracy, once the majority has made a decision EVERYONE is absolutely bound by it 14:15:14 oh, I see, there might be a lingustic issue between us here 14:15:22 that means the miniority and individual have NO rights what so ever 14:15:55 in a republic every individual is a sovereign in their own right. you are ENTIRELY self governing. you are not bound by any of the institutions of your fellowmen without your consent 14:16:12 and your consent must be a knowingly intelligent act made with sufficient awareness 14:16:18 but he said he was from a democracy... 14:16:22 but yeah, the american lawyer bar assoication sounds like a self intrest corporation. 14:16:30 exactly what it is 14:16:36 its a tyrany 14:16:45 reepca: Lýðveldið Ísland is what it is called. 14:16:59 The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced as the very definition of tyranny. 14:17:07 james madison 14:17:32 for most of our history all 3 branches of our government have been populated primarily by members of the bar corporation 14:18:03 even now they run rampant throughout two of the 3 14:18:04 your perhaps, as I do not know American history that well and I assume the vice versa here 14:18:25 i know nothing of iceland other than its green and greenland is icy :) 14:19:35 USA has many issues as it doesnt seem to had made up its mind if it is one huge country or federation of smaller ones. 14:22:20 no the problem started ith abraham lincoln 14:22:22 one difference I know of is the difference between EULA and TOS. The former is not enforcable as no communication of agreement nor echange has taken place while the latter is enforcable in the sense that you are an guest at an party and might get kicked out. (Basically service discontinued) 14:22:35 this country is a nation of independent states united in a common cause 14:23:12 the states are ENTIRELY self governing. the federal goverment has jurisdiction ONLY over foreign imports, interstate commerce and foreign treaties. 14:23:16 define nation, nobody seems to ever had given me concise and unambigious defenition. 14:23:30 a nation is a union of people 14:23:47 Any union of people? 14:23:52 in this country the people are first. the states are second, the federal government is last 14:24:02 the venn diagram is quite busy 14:24:10 no. usually a people who populate a specific geographical location 14:24:11 so to speak 14:24:39 the United States of America is a union of independent states. each one governs itself and cannot govern any other 14:24:46 that applies to people how live in cities/towns that stirde country borders 14:25:01 the federal government has simply usurped powers not granted to it 14:25:06 yes! 14:25:14 tho those are usually known as communities 14:25:58 btw, one of the things im trying to do is go to washington D.C. to petition my government directly 14:26:01 i have that right 14:26:12 but none of my servants have any clue about it 14:26:20 An country, at least to me, is a spefic set of geographical reagions. Like how you name provinces and such. 14:26:39 a country is a nation but a nation does not need to be a country 14:26:44 for example. the APACHE nation 14:27:06 that is a bundle of bloodlines/familes and a culture. 14:27:16 not always 14:27:23 i could go join the apache nation if they let me in :) 14:27:37 think of them as different levels of "community" 14:29:14 this is why 'national security' makes no sense to me. We use almannavarnir which means 'defense of people (against various natural and unnatural disasters or concrete dangers)'. 14:31:15 and people is just the plural of person in this context. 14:31:22 no 14:31:28 actually i am a "people" 14:31:31 i am one "people" 14:31:36 people is not plural for person 14:31:42 "persons" is plural for "person" 14:32:11 more generally you see the term "one of the people" 14:32:40 people is just a word for a group of persons, like fag is a word for a bundle of sticks. 14:33:12 or embarresment for group of ankh morpork swamp dragons 14:35:44 I am not saying this to be contrary, but this is how I understand English in this regard. 14:37:00 so what goverment gover over is not countries but polities that have geographical juristiction|responsibility 14:38:25 jurisdiction is a moving goal post - it depends on WHICH government 14:40:06 jurisdiction ends at the geographical border of that polity at that level. 14:42:04 no 14:42:10 jurisdiciton is not based on geography 14:42:19 its based on what they have authority voer 14:42:21 over 14:42:55 if the federal goverenments jurisdiction was based on geography they would only have jurisdiciton over a 50 square mile section of land 14:43:16 known as "The United States" which is not the same thing as "The United States of America" 14:43:35 "the United States" is "the federal government within washington D.C." 14:44:52 this is why USA gov thinks it can tax economic activty performed by persons that happen to hold American citizenship but actually does not by any streatch of logic. 14:45:47 the federal goverment has juristiction over the states, in certain matters, because the those states have submitted to that juristiction. 14:47:07 then you have counties in those states, muncipalities in those counties and so on down the scale, no? 14:51:08 oh, yeah, just looked it up the english translation of "Lýðveldið Ísland" is "Democratic Republic of Iceland". 14:58:19 there is a difference between a citizen and one of the people 14:58:26 i am not a citizen of the united states 14:58:32 i am one of the people 14:58:57 you were born in that geographical region, yes? 14:59:04 a citizen is defined as someone who "lives within the city of" or is "subject to" 14:59:19 You are a citizen of Texas, yes? 14:59:35 that could be argued yes but "one of the people" has more authority 14:59:50 if you are a citizen you owe your allegiance to and get reciprocal protection from a government 15:00:12 till the 14th amendment there was no such thing as a citizen of the federal government 15:00:24 they couldnt tax or regulate individuals at all 15:00:28 they STILL cant 15:00:32 not lawfully 15:00:35 a citizenship is like an contractual obligation is it not? You can renounce it like you renounce a contract, no? 15:00:52 no. i dont renounce my citizenship. i say i never was a "citizen" 15:01:03 i am not now and have never been a statutory 14th amendment citizen 15:01:06 i am one of the people 15:01:36 not what I meant. Just like you are not a customer of Orange2 the telecom in Germany 15:01:45 heh 15:01:55 --- quit: true-grue (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 15:01:56 citizenship is contractual yes 15:02:20 in order for that contract to be binding it must have full disclosure and equal consideration 15:02:31 it entirely lacks full disclosure 15:02:40 it is therefore entirely null and void ab initio 15:03:51 and because it is between an individual and a country-sized polity then that polity can not dictate the terms in onerous ways just like Orange2 cannot dictate the terms of the mobile phone contract in onerous ways, yes? 15:04:38 it cannot dictate any terms. the contract is unlawful in this case right from its inception 15:04:49 you CANNOT have a "citizen of the federal government" 15:04:54 that is beyond its authority 15:05:15 the 14th amendment should never have been enacted. 15:05:17 yes indeed it is beyond its authority but not the authority of the state Texas? 15:05:26 also. the constitution does not grant anything to ME. it does not limit ME. 15:05:48 no its beyond the authority of the state of texas too unless i personally agree 15:05:49 i dont 15:05:53 it is the otherway around, it binds and restrict the USA government. 15:06:14 correct. the constitution CREATED and DEFINED and RESTRICTED the federal goverenment 15:06:22 its the constitution FOR the united states "not OF" 15:06:25 then you are basically a resident in Texas then. I take you pay taxes for the state service aviable to you? 15:06:35 actually resident is not quite correct eikther 15:06:36 either 15:06:48 a resident is transitory. someone passing through 15:06:52 not domiciled there 15:06:58 on a permanent basis 15:06:59 --- part: boinkboink left #forth 15:07:15 an example of "resident" being used correctly is when a doctor takes up residence at a hospital 15:07:18 "resident, noun: to reside somewhere. Example: The book resided on the shelf" 15:07:22 thats NOT his permanent duty station 15:07:30 thats not the legal definition 15:07:45 legal english is an entirely different language. 15:07:50 UTTERLY different 15:08:14 indeed and they should therefor not use English as it basis 15:09:00 because interlingual incomprehension 15:09:55 REsidence means living in a particular locality, but domicile means living in that locality with intent to make it a fixed and permanent home. 15:09:58 lojban legalese: the way of the future? 15:09:59 residence is transitory 15:10:15 like the word limir in Icelandic means extermities like arms and legs while in Foreyar Islandic it means members of some group 15:10:21 legal english was devised for ONE purpose only 15:10:33 to obfuscate legal proceedings so that the lay person would not understand it 15:10:35 PERIOD 15:10:40 its fraud 15:10:53 reepca: I wish, based on agora nomic meta meta ruleset rules 15:11:34 my book has a chapter on legal english 15:11:43 "the secret language of the judicial high priesthood" 15:12:06 domicile is place to reside in, nothing more nothing less. (Basically it is derived from domain iirc) 15:12:11 http://solon.x10host.com/affidavit/language.php 15:12:36 but it suggests permanence. residency suggests temporary 15:12:57 not in general popular english use but in a court 15:13:22 my book uses the word "including" as an example of how dishonest legal english is 15:13:31 haha, oh. You can be domiciled in a houseboat, no? In a trailer in a trailer park, no? 15:13:39 utterly dishonest, corrupt and deliberately misleading 15:13:52 yes or a cardboard box lol 15:14:06 but i would question the it not being temporary 15:14:31 the word temporary is very elastic in its range of duration 15:15:13 yes 15:15:15 ive been here 3 years 15:15:32 i do not consider it a permanent home 15:15:38 i consider myself transitory 15:15:43 so, basically as many people do not own their homes but rent them, it suggest that they are only residants but not domicilied, yes? 15:17:47 mark4: btw "you can not expect any constitutional conventions to be convened any time between now and the time the sun expires" implies that USA will endure that long. Goverments seldom last that long. 15:18:38 it doesnt imply it, but it suggest that it will take longer than that for a constitutional convention to be called :) 15:18:42 there has never been one yet 15:18:43 not once 15:22:07 brb, going to store 15:36:08 --- quit: dual (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 15:37:47 --- join: wa5qjh (~Thunderbi@121.54.90.133) joined #forth 15:50:16 --- join: circ-user-ZCCmR (~circuser-@2602:304:4159:4770:7c99:5552:d5e9:46b7) joined #forth 16:04:40 --- quit: nighty (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 16:11:46 --- join: ricky_ricardo (~rickyrica@2602:306:328f:79f0:3842:ad19:d795:cc69) joined #forth 16:14:05 --- quit: ricky_ricardo (Remote host closed the connection) 16:18:50 mark4: just meant that USA goverment in current form will be history long before the sun burns out. 16:20:47 --- quit: Zarutian (Quit: Zarutian) 16:23:41 --- quit: circ-user-ZCCmR (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 16:27:22 --- join: newuser|13985 (4fb5a6f7@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.79.181.166.247) joined #forth 16:40:45 well i consider it already gone. we have already lost our constitutional republic 16:40:59 it has been stealthily replaced with a oligarchy 16:51:58 does the oligarchy have any good javascript forth to play with? 16:52:55 --- join: nighty (~nighty@d246113.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp) joined #forth 17:05:55 newuser|13985: https://repl.it/languages/forth 17:13:46 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 17:22:01 Is there a version of does> one might use that takes an xt off the stack? 17:32:12 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:7ce2:8436:611e:7ea6) joined #forth 17:36:34 --- quit: mnemnion (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 17:38:05 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@2601:643:8102:7c95:7ce2:8436:611e:7ea6) joined #forth 17:58:54 --- join: dual (~bonafide@cpe-74-75-153-119.maine.res.rr.com) joined #forth 18:28:24 thats not really how does> works 18:28:37 ecept at the same time it IS how it works 18:28:54 let me explain how i implemented does> in isforth (now called x4) 18:29:04 does uses ;code 18:29:12 when you create a word in isforth it is always a variable 18:29:14 create foo 18:29:20 compiles the following 18:29:22 foo: 18:29:31 call dovariable 18:29:33 .int 0 18:29:46 the CALL to dovariable leaves the address of the body of the variable on the stack 18:29:55 ;code patches that call to dovariable 18:30:14 when you have a word such as : constant create , does> @ ; 18:30:50 does> is an immediate word which compiles a ;code 18:31:02 it then compiles a "call dodoes" opcode 18:31:25 when you run that does> word it CREATES a new instance of a variable and then calls ;code 18:32:14 ;code patches the CFA of the word that was just created to "call" the assembler opcode that was assembied immediately following the ;code (by the way, when you execute ;code it is an immediate exit so nothing after that is executed) 18:32:23 so - the new word looks like this 18:32:24 foo: 18:32:37 call xyzzy \ some address that then contains a "call dodoes" 18:33:06 dodoes pushes the current IP onto the return stack and POPS the first of two items now on the stack. 18:33:32 this is the new address for IP. 18:33:55 the code that came immeiately after does> which in this case is just a @ and an exit 18:34:18 the FETCH fetches the data that is in the body of the created word which did the call to xyzzy 18:34:27 not sure if im explaining it well lol 18:34:35 it IS a squirly sequence of operations 18:34:51 : constant create , does> @ ; <-- this compiles into 18:34:53 constant: 18:34:57 .int create 18:35:00 .int comma 18:35:06 .int ;code 18:35:10 call dodoes 18:35:14 .int fetch 18:35:16 .int exit 18:35:50 when this code is executed ;code patches the CFA of the word that this creates to call the call to dodoes 18:36:52 so does> sort of splits the definition into two parts and directs the "variable" to point to the second half? 18:37:19 yes 18:37:31 it is always a "Create does>" operation 18:37:47 its like saying "create this word for me which does> the following when it is called 18:37:59 : constant create , does> @ ; is a very good example 18:38:02 0 constant foo 18:38:16 constant creates a word called foo and COMMAS in the value specified 18:38:37 the does> PATCHES it to "do" the following code when invoked 18:39:01 foo calls the "call dodoes" opcode thats hidden under "does>" in the above definition. 18:39:10 so its a call to a call leaving two addresses on the stack 18:39:10 I guess I'm looking for a way to patch it directly to do an arbitrary action that might have already been compiled 18:39:24 you can do that too 18:39:30 not only is there ;code 18:39:35 theres also ;uses 18:40:19 : constant create , ;uses doconstant 18:40:37 where doconstant is simply a fetch operation 18:40:52 in isforth where top of stack is cached in a register doconstant is 18:40:56 doconstant: 18:41:05 pop eax 18:41:09 push ebx 18:41:22 mov dword [eax], ebx 18:41:23 next 18:41:31 thats kind of from memory so might not be exactly right lol 18:42:03 the CFA of the constant was patched to call doconstant 18:43:50 does that help? 18:44:42 ive not traced it out logically in my mind but i think ;uses must reference a coded definition, not sure if you can ;uses a colon definition 18:45:29 btw : constant create , does> @ ; is not how constant is usually defined. the second way : constant create , ;uses doconstant ; is more common 18:46:22 ;uses patches the CFA of the most recently created word to call the address specified in the next token in the execution stream ";uses doconstant" in this case doconstant 18:46:41 so ;uses does the same thing (lit) does, it reads the next XT out of the execution stream 18:46:47 ;uses is a parsing word then? 18:47:00 no 18:47:04 not at compile time 18:47:07 at run time 18:47:11 constant 18:47:13 .int create 18:47:16 .int comma 18:47:18 oh okay 18:47:24 .int ;uses 18:47:29 .int doconstant 18:47:34 .int exit 18:48:00 when ;uses runs it reads the next xt from the execution stream (in this case its .int doconstant) and advances IP past it 18:48:15 then it uses that address to patch the word that was just created 18:48:34 we can always tell the address of the most recent words NFA because thats in "last" 18:48:52 so we just use name> to scan from the NFA of the new word to its CFA 18:49:37 srsly hope im not confutzing the hell out of you lol 18:51:32 --- quit: phadthai (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) 18:52:18 nah it's making some sense (I'm not too clear on threading in general, having only just recently taken my first class that uses assembly). I wish I better understood how threaded and machine-code definitions interact, though 18:53:32 ok the implementation im talking about here is direct threading 18:53:46 the entry point to EVERY word is always a machine code opcode 18:53:56 even on high level definitions 18:54:06 a colon definition is a "call" to nest 18:54:11 a constant is a call to doconstant 18:54:15 a variable is a call to dovariable 18:54:25 all of these are low level coded definitions too 18:54:36 so a colon definition would be 18:54:39 foo: 18:54:41 call nest 18:54:44 .int .bar 18:54:48 .int bam 18:54:56 .int exit 18:55:12 the call to nest pushes the current IP onto the return stack 18:55:22 it then pops the return address of the above call into IP 18:55:30 every coded definition ends in a "next" 18:55:37 what next does in this scenario is... 18:55:52 lodsw (because SI is IP in my forth) 18:55:54 jmp eax 18:56:18 jump to the address pointed to by the address pointed to by the execution token 18:56:23 every XT is a .int somewhere 18:56:42 lodsw loads the 32 bit item pointed to by ESI into eax 18:56:47 jmp eax jumps to it 18:57:00 we know every entry point to every word is an opcode so we can do this 18:57:11 indirect threading is somewhat more complex 18:57:42 subroutine threading is simpler but doesnt give you must insight into how "forth" threading works :) 18:58:06 x4 in my github is direct threaded 18:58:11 t4 is subroutine threaded 18:58:35 both are for linux... x86 and arm 18:58:46 so every colon definition begins with a sort of "call to interpret self"? 18:59:14 yes 18:59:20 a call to a coded definition called NEST 18:59:23 nest: 18:59:41 push esi onto return stack 18:59:50 pop return address of call into ESI 18:59:51 next 19:00:05 ESI in my forth is used as the interpretive pointer 19:00:56 all colon definitions end in "exit" all coded definitions end in "next" 19:01:12 exit is "pop top of return stack back into ESI" 19:01:33 if you download my sources you will see the code in src/kernel/exec.s 19:03:40 So the system has two different "instruction pointer"-ish things, the program counter held in a register that gets automatically updated by the cpu and the interpreter counter, also held in a register, that gets manually updated with each interpreted call? 19:04:07 err interpreter pointer 19:04:58 yes IP is forths instruction pointer 19:05:03 because forth is a virtual machine 19:05:11 IP is used to say where forth has executed up to 19:05:34 every forth execution token is a virtual machine opcode 19:05:52 sometimes they are ACTUAL machine opcodes (i.e. the processor is microcoded in forth) 19:08:06 --- join: phadthai (mmondor@ginseng.pulsar-zone.net) joined #forth 20:06:33 --- quit: wa5qjh (Remote host closed the connection) 20:23:33 --- quit: newuser|13985 (Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client) 20:52:11 --- quit: dual (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 21:12:01 --- join: dual (~bonafide@cpe-74-75-153-119.maine.res.rr.com) joined #forth 21:17:58 --- quit: ACE_Recliner (Remote host closed the connection) 21:38:57 --- quit: dual (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) 22:06:30 --- join: wa5qjh (~Thunderbi@121.54.90.159) joined #forth 22:10:48 --- quit: wa5qjh (Remote host closed the connection) 22:45:48 --- quit: neceve (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 23:06:05 --- join: neceve (~ncv@79.113.88.232) joined #forth 23:06:05 --- quit: neceve (Changing host) 23:06:05 --- join: neceve (~ncv@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 23:06:10 hm, so x4 readable by "non-asm" programmers? let's check it on non-asm non-programmer! (me) 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/17.01.26