00:00:00 --- log: started forth/18.10.24 00:08:13 --- quit: Keshl (Quit: Konversation terminated!) 00:09:50 --- join: Keshl (~Purple@24.115.185.149.res-cmts.gld.ptd.net) joined #forth 00:26:18 --- quit: pierpal (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 00:28:46 --- quit: reich (Remote host closed the connection) 00:29:04 --- join: reich (~reich@71-88-195-60.dhcp.kgpt.tn.charter.com) joined #forth 00:30:49 --- quit: dave0 (Quit: dave's not here) 00:31:26 --- join: xek (~xek@apn-31-0-23-83.dynamic.gprs.plus.pl) joined #forth 00:56:49 --- quit: cheater (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) 00:59:23 --- join: cheater (~cheater@unaffiliated/cheater) joined #forth 02:28:32 --- quit: nighty- (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 02:32:05 --- join: nighty- (~nighty@s229123.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp) joined #forth 02:33:00 --- quit: reich (Remote host closed the connection) 03:07:22 --- quit: Keshl (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 03:07:45 --- join: Keshl (~Purple@24.115.185.149) joined #forth 03:21:25 --- join: ncv (~neceve@2a02:c7d:c5c9:a900:6eaf:6ef7:3b81:d5f6) joined #forth 03:21:25 --- quit: ncv (Changing host) 03:21:25 --- join: ncv (~neceve@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 03:56:18 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 04:03:34 --- quit: wa5qjh (Remote host closed the connection) 04:21:22 --- quit: xek (Remote host closed the connection) 04:22:46 --- join: xek (~xek@apn-31-0-23-83.dynamic.gprs.plus.pl) joined #forth 04:33:28 --- quit: pierpal (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) 04:44:58 --- join: johnnymacs (~user@9.173.192.35.bc.googleusercontent.com) joined #forth 04:47:16 What is the difference between a word which requires infix notation and a word which does not? 04:48:56 which word requires infix notation? 04:53:21 : 04:56:29 I'm no expert forther, but that's not a word in the traditional sense for me 04:56:34 that is compiler syntax 04:56:43 Forth is all postfix 04:56:52 Sure you could make + use infix 04:57:49 But keep postfix convention 04:59:49 siraben: how would you do that? how would you define a word that operates on stuff that isn't on the stack yet? 05:00:23 Make it consume the next word following it 05:00:30 That's how : operates 05:02:21 johnnymacs is a troll, just fyi 05:03:47 but : is a word just like any other word. it just parses the next word after it 05:04:22 same as ' or [postpone] 05:07:03 --- quit: Guest88256 (Quit: leaving) 05:07:12 --- join: WilhelmVonWeiner (dch@ny1.hashbang.sh) joined #forth 05:08:50 Writing an emacs-like in mostly portable Forth 05:09:28 I second zyzy]x[yz, they have trolled several channels 05:09:38 Although I can't for the life of me figure out how to find out if ctrl is pressed. 05:09:46 siraben: who's trolling? 05:09:54 johnnymacs 05:12:25 Looking at the logs, not a very good troll if so 05:14:48 Check other channel logs 05:14:51 #lisp 05:15:05 #emacs (where they are banned) 05:15:44 I don't wanna judge too much, just putting it out there in case. 05:17:02 WilhelmVonWeiner, he used to come here with the nick John[Lisbeth] and he posts on the reddit page as read_harder 05:17:38 his reddit posts are pretty representative 05:19:55 Years ago there was a Russian guy (I think) that hung out here in #forth and specialized in tearing Forth down any way he possibly could. 05:19:58 It got... very old. 05:20:18 I just don't understand how someone can draw pleasure from such things. 05:21:19 It's not hard to tear down modern Forth 05:21:27 --- join: rdrop-exit (~markwilli@112.201.162.180) joined #forth 05:21:34 BLAME ANS! 05:21:46 ANSI is ANTI Forth! 05:21:58 lol i think i might know who you're talking about, KipIngram. i think he got banned 05:22:45 jonnymacs just sounds rude from his reddit posts, but not particularly "a troll" 05:25:44 That's my understanding as well, zy]x[yz. 05:29:10 I agree on ANS, it was inevitable that it would end up a mess 05:29:34 ciforth presents itself as last of the FIG Forths 05:30:00 also the most useful, least bloated canonical forth I've used 05:30:25 I think it's a mistake to treat Forth as a language 05:30:25 Compatible with ANS CORE tho. 05:32:19 and to try to standardize Forth the way computer languages are standardized 05:35:25 You can't pin down Forth with syntax descriptions a la BNF 05:41:27 Yeah I agree. 05:42:03 A well-formed Forth program is essentially all programs, in the same way assembly is. 05:43:01 KipIngram: I thought about getting an Arduino and porting a Forth to that 05:43:26 And doing some IoT type things for home convenience 05:45:19 rdrop-exit: Yes, I agree with that too. 05:45:26 Forth is more of a methodology and mind-set. 05:46:02 Implementing IoT type projects 05:48:22 --- quit: rdrop-exit (Quit: Lost terminal) 06:22:56 siraben: There are a bunch - amForth, FlashForth, avrforth 06:23:26 for non-arduinos there's mecrisp and mecrisp-stellaris 06:23:54 Roll my own 06:23:55 --- join: dave0 (~dave@90.20.215.218.dyn.iprimus.net.au) joined #forth 06:24:11 re 06:24:20 but why? 06:24:25 You know what - don't answer that 06:34:24 siraben: ya targeting ATMEGA32 ? I am doing a project where I am using one of those and programming it in DTC style even though I might not port a forth to it. 06:41:28 Zarutian: I don't know exactly what model, yet. 06:42:06 siraben: the ATEMEGA32 in PDIP packages are the most common ones. 06:42:23 (PDIP looks like an catepillar bug btw) 07:08:15 siraben: A lot of the little Arduino / Raspberry Pi gadgets out there these days make really attractive Forth targets. 07:08:27 I'm looking forward to getting more involved with the one I've got. 07:12:58 KipIngram: which done do you have? 07:13:01 One 07:38:13 --- quit: tabemann (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 07:45:15 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 07:53:23 siraben: This one: 07:53:25 https://learn.adafruit.com/introducing-adafruit-itsybitsy-m4/overview 07:59:04 I like how they've set up the bootloader - you can cause it to mount a drive on your host, with the boot loader as a file in that drive. 07:59:11 You can just replace that file - that's "programming it." 07:59:24 In normal mode it presents a different drive - you don't see the bootloader. 07:59:43 But you do see a Python file that you can tinker with, and when you make a serial connection to the thing out of the box you get the Python interpreter. 07:59:50 So they've made it REALLY easy to tinker around. 08:00:17 I want to replace the Python interpreter (that's really what I meant when I said "bootloader" before - I won't be changing the bootloader; I'll be changing what it boots). 08:00:38 Replace it with a FORTH.UF2 file, so when I make the serial connection I get my Forth. 08:02:26 So I spent a bit of time yesterday refamiliarizing myself with my WP-34S calculator. 08:15:14 I see. 08:15:17 Ah, how is that calculator? 08:15:29 What language does it use? 08:22:30 --- quit: pierpal (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) 08:36:25 --- quit: jedb (Remote host closed the connection) 08:36:38 --- join: jedb (~jedb@199.66.90.113) joined #forth 08:55:20 It "keystroke programmable." 08:55:27 Has some tests, branching capability, etc. 08:55:32 It's "its own" language. 08:55:40 It's a nice and feature packed little calculator. 08:55:57 It's not actual "real" - its made by re-flashing an HP-20b or HP 30b. 08:56:13 You can buy one already reflashed and with a keyboard overlay and key stickers relabeling the keys. 08:56:29 Some people regard it as the most powerful non-graphing scientific calculator in the world. 08:56:41 There are like 300 functions in it that had never before appeared on any calculator. 08:57:35 I have sort of an innate desire to become good at using it, but the problem with that is that calculators just aren't as "important" as they used to be. 08:57:55 When I was younger my calculator was the go-to tools for any sort of calculation I needed to make, and being able to program it put a lot of power in my hands. 08:58:03 But these days most things are easier to do some other way. 08:58:25 well, I been seeing calculator emulators on smartphones these days. 09:00:14 Yes, I have two good ones on my phone, and when I *do* use a calculator that's what I commonly go to. 09:00:44 I have emulators for the HP-41C lineup and the HP-42S. 09:00:50 I use the 42S emulator most of the time. 09:01:05 The 41C line is just sentimental to me, because that's the one I bought freshman year in college. 09:01:12 Many, that baby just got me through things. 09:02:00 I love how well both of those emulators LOOK LIKE the real calculator. 09:02:12 They really did a good job with the presentation. 09:03:12 did you have the ppc rom for it and is it really as useful as people claim? 09:03:30 have heard talks on it but never had a chance to play with one 09:06:25 No, I never had that. My memory is fuzzy on it, but iirc it was just a rom with a bunch of routines in it. 09:06:33 Didn't really add any new power to the calculator. 09:06:43 I always felt perfectly capable of writing anything I needed to write. 09:07:14 I wasn't looking for the ability to "do things I didn't know how to do" - I was just looking to accelerate the calculations that came from my knowledge. 09:07:25 I know it was a really popular thing, though. 09:07:33 yeah it was a rom with a lot of routines on it. i don't know enough about the 41C to guess how well or badly they interoperated with each other e.g. 09:07:45 Yeah, I have no idea. 09:08:10 I have this vague notion that I looked at the list at some point, didn't really like the names they'd chosen, and thought the whole thing looked rather haphazard. 09:08:36 I rarely bothered to "can" little short calculations, and I'm thinking a lot of the PPC was that. 09:08:45 Just mostly to avoid you having to memorize formulae. 09:09:01 I just calculated such things when I needed them - I was fast on that thing. 09:09:21 When I wrote programs they were designed to implement very elaborate algorthms, like Gaussian elimination using complex arithmetic, and stuff like that. 09:09:31 Stuff the calculator had to spend some time on. 09:09:44 *nod* 09:10:19 or even simple stuff that needs to be iterated a lot of times 09:10:25 Right. 09:10:36 But I just didn't need an Ohm's law program, etc. :-) 09:10:41 :P 09:10:47 After all, that's the stuff I was in school to LEARN. 09:11:23 I usually don't even bother to learn how to use a calculator's temperature conversion functions (which is a pretty common feature). 09:11:34 I know how to convert those, and it's not very time consuming. 09:12:36 you mean you don't use the path of least resistance when coding? 09:12:43 Just add 40, multiply by 9/5 for C->F or 5/9 for F->C, and subtract 40. 09:13:00 I do - my path of least resistance is just different from a lot of people's. 09:13:10 hm. i like having convenience functions for unit conversions just because it reduces the kind of tedium that leads to careless errors 09:13:10 But I'm a huge fan of that path. :-) 09:13:22 I meant that re: +KipIngram> But I just didn't need an Ohm's law program 09:13:24 Well, if I had to do it a lot I might feel differently. 09:13:33 But I might do a temperature conversion 3-4 times a year. 09:13:53 I agree with you, actually - if something is going to be repeated a lot it's best to minimize human input to the process. 09:14:28 But that little algorithm above is just in an easier to reach part of my memory that "the name of that function." 09:14:37 fair 09:15:06 and there definitely exist menu systems clumsy enough that the convenience function doesn't even save keystrokes :| 09:15:32 That's true. 09:15:55 That's the daunting part of learning the WP 34S. It has like 600 functions total. 09:16:06 Just a lot to even "learn are there." 09:16:24 Apparently they went all out packing the available space as full of things as they could. 09:17:45 One thing that's a bit disappointing, though, is that it only has around 970 or so max program steps. 09:17:54 And each digit of a number is a step. 09:18:10 I haven't really thought much about it yet, but it seems to me like I could easily fill that up with something involved. 09:18:44 And that's if you've shifted the RAM allocation totally to program steps - the more registers you allocate for data storage, the fewer steps you get. 09:18:53 I think it only has like 6k of RAM or something like that. 09:19:10 does it just use a flat space of numbered variables or so? 09:19:30 More or less, but it does have support for locals. 09:20:01 that is probably my least favorite feature of the keystroke-programmable HPs 09:20:17 You have to call otu your local requirements explicitly in the code. 09:20:21 out 09:20:34 If you don't, you can access your caller's l ocals. 09:20:47 Once you allocate your own, though, the caller's locals are out of reach. 09:20:53 that's just a matter of programming discipline 09:21:20 My HP-41C didn't have that - I had to "mentally manage" the numbered registers. 09:22:23 I never got as good at programming the 42S as I did the 41C; I wasn't in college anymore when I bought that one. 09:22:44 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 09:22:54 But in college each new engineering course brought on a new wave of "how to I labor save here?" 09:22:58 i don't mind mentally managing slots but the single global namespace is not nice if you want to call one routine from another 09:23:37 Right. That's probably another reason I tended toward large, involved programs. 09:23:51 My whole approach wasn't about having a library full of routines that I could "gang together." 09:40:24 right. not sure how much documentaiton would be forthcoming if one wanted to write custom firmware for the dm-42 but one is tempted to try 09:40:39 *documentation 09:41:54 free42 sources look pretty straightforward even if they unfortunately have assumptions about the four-register stack baked in throughout the code 09:42:50 even though i only seldom use complex numbers i really want to be able to use them without halving my stack depth 09:43:39 locals support would probably not be too hard to add (hope i'm not embarrassing myself by it being there already) 09:48:28 looks like hp-30b is discontinued(?!) 09:51:49 apart from being a kinpo calculator under a vinyl overlay the wp 34s looks really nice. was looking at it a few years back too.. 09:52:22 is the physical feel of the calculator better than one would expect from that description? 09:57:00 or, 30b is not kinpo(?) 09:57:01 either way 09:59:03 --- quit: pierpal (Quit: Poof) 09:59:23 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 09:59:38 42s and 15c are both really nice about having all the important stuff accessible in 1-2 keystrokes 10:00:12 34s looks less so but that is indeed a lot of functionality there :O 10:03:47 --- quit: pierpal (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 10:04:06 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 10:04:32 KipIngram, maybe you should try the temp conversion feature 10:04:37 the formula you gave is wrong. you add 32, not 40 :P 10:08:38 Different formula. 10:08:42 Try it. 10:09:00 32+40=72, 72*5/9=40, 40-40=0. 10:10:05 oh i see 10:10:07 140*9/5 = 252 10:10:07 youre right 10:11:34 Easier to remember to me. 10:12:08 It's really the same thing, just with factors moved around. 10:14:18 It's easier forme to remember because you always +40 at the beginning and -40 at the end, regardless of which way you're converting. 10:15:13 Only the fraction is different, and that's easy to keeep up with. 10:16:24 Works because -40 F = -40 C. 10:18:09 ah i get it now. i misunderstood your conversion formula :) 10:19:57 i took the clauses on either side of the "or" to be separate formulae 10:20:17 it's one extra operation but i can see the order being easier to remember 10:37:22 My dad was a chemistry professor - he taught me to do it that way. 10:38:11 I probably coudln't write down the "standard" formulae without working them out. 10:39:43 Well, I guess I could actually, but I'd still be working them out. Just in my head while I wrote. 10:39:52 F = (9/5)*C + 32, right? 10:40:28 yes 10:41:27 So that means F + 40 = (9/5)*C + 72 = (9/5)*(C + 40). 10:41:56 yes 10:42:35 er 10:42:53 yes 11:13:18 --- join: weldon (~weldon@static-71-246-230-61.washdc.fios.verizon.net) joined #forth 11:13:32 --- quit: weldon (Client Quit) 11:15:59 --- join: bandrami (~weldon@static-71-246-230-61.washdc.fios.verizon.net) joined #forth 11:39:37 --- join: Keshl_ (~Purple@24.115.185.149.res-cmts.gld.ptd.net) joined #forth 11:44:18 --- join: jn___ (~nope@aftr-109-91-37-251.unity-media.net) joined #forth 11:44:19 --- join: WilhelmV1nWeiner (dch@ny1.hashbang.sh) joined #forth 11:45:34 --- join: cheater_ (~cheater@unaffiliated/cheater) joined #forth 11:49:13 --- quit: pierpal (*.net *.split) 11:49:13 --- quit: WilhelmVonWeiner (*.net *.split) 11:49:13 --- quit: Keshl (*.net *.split) 11:49:13 --- quit: cheater (*.net *.split) 11:49:13 --- quit: dave9 (*.net *.split) 11:49:13 --- quit: KipIngram (*.net *.split) 11:49:13 --- quit: jn__ (*.net *.split) 11:49:21 --- nick: cheater_ -> cheater 11:49:21 --- quit: bandrami (Quit: Leaving) 11:49:59 --- nick: jn___ -> jn__ 11:50:32 --- join: KipIngram (~kipingram@185.149.90.58) joined #forth 11:50:56 --- nick: KipIngram -> Guest92159 11:54:56 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 11:57:59 --- nick: Guest92159 -> KipIngram 11:58:07 --- mode: ChanServ set +v KipIngram 11:59:56 --- quit: pierpal (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 12:00:04 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 12:25:23 --- quit: dave0 (Quit: dave's not here) 12:48:53 --- quit: jedb (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 13:01:23 --- join: jedb (~jedb@199.66.90.113) joined #forth 13:39:07 --- join: dave9 (~dave@90.20.215.218.dyn.iprimus.net.au) joined #forth 14:05:24 --- join: xek_ (~xek@apn-31-0-23-80.dynamic.gprs.plus.pl) joined #forth 14:07:47 --- quit: xek (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 14:09:12 --- quit: xek_ (Remote host closed the connection) 14:14:24 I hate it when it's after 5:00 and I said "one last compile" to myself over 20 minutes ago 14:16:35 Hmmm. 14:16:49 Ok, so I'm taking this trip down calculator programming memory lane. 14:17:19 And I'm remembering how much use I made of instructions like ST+. 14:17:25 Of course we have +! 14:17:37 But I also frequently used those against the stack registers. 14:17:47 ST+ Z etc. 14:18:03 So that's similar to my first implementation of the stack access words - the ones that used the stack pointer. 14:18:11 I'm thinking more and more that maybe I want those as well. 14:18:41 Not "free numeric parameter" ones that would reach anywhere, but just ones with hard-coded target for the top few items, similar to the calculator stack. 14:19:06 Then I'd be able to program the system in just the way I used to program my calculator, where that made sense. 14:55:25 --- join: wa5qjh (~quassel@175.158.225.193) joined #forth 14:55:25 --- quit: wa5qjh (Changing host) 14:55:25 --- join: wa5qjh (~quassel@freebsd/user/wa5qjh) joined #forth 15:12:15 --- quit: wa5qjh (Quit: http://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.) 15:30:54 --- quit: WilhelmV1nWeiner (Quit: Reconnecting) 15:31:02 --- join: WilhelmVonWeiner (dch@ny1.hashbang.sh) joined #forth 15:42:50 --- quit: pierpal (Quit: Poof) 15:43:07 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 15:51:58 --- quit: malyn (Quit: "") 15:59:30 --- quit: ncv (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) 16:59:04 --- join: tabemann (~tabemann@rrcs-162-155-170-75.central.biz.rr.com) joined #forth 17:20:20 --- join: Mat4 (~eh@ip5b409c40.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de) joined #forth 17:31:03 --- join: malyn (~malyn@unaffiliated/malyn) joined #forth 17:34:36 --- quit: Mat4 (Quit: Yaaic - Yet another Android IRC client - http://www.yaaic.org) 17:45:12 --- quit: malyn (Quit: "") 17:46:03 --- join: malyn (~malyn@unaffiliated/malyn) joined #forth 18:35:52 Despite being "programmable" TI very much doesn't want its users to program that much 18:36:18 Hence a poor language (TI-BASIC) is implemented. 18:38:42 ah, yes, one of my greatest life achievements: in high school I wrote a multiplayer tic-tac-toe game for the TI-83 in TI-BASIC 18:38:45 ... on the TI 18:38:52 it was very tedious 18:45:35 I just got around the issue that Unix makes it hard for a process to know when it comes to the foreground from being in the background 18:46:03 because this was previously breaking my readline-esque UI when I'd do ^Z and then fg 18:46:46 siraben: mind you that various forms of BASIC were very common on microcomputers at one time 18:48:01 Right, but BASIC is a slow language 18:48:10 Well, compared to Forth 18:49:44 that's because people implementing microcomputers were ignorant of the superiority of Forth 18:52:26 (of course, my Forth is slow, because it has things like stack checks and an optional tracing tool that can be turned on at runtime that displays each word executed along with the top of the stack 19:01:13 Huh, there's an AsmComp( command on my calculator 19:01:24 If I type the hex bytes manually (!) then I can compile it. 19:02:55 lol 19:03:54 I'm wondering how I can simplify the kernel of my Forth 19:04:27 like the kernel contains a full Forth interpreter, for the purposes of compiling the code in a big string in one of my source files 19:04:39 which itself contains another Forth interpreter 19:04:45 but one suited for interactive use 19:05:07 whereas the builtin interpreter can't do interactive really 19:06:22 I believe I saw a video where a person typed out the hex bytes manually, but if I were to make an assembler I'll make it spit out the hex code. 19:08:57 --- join: jn___ (~nope@aftr-109-90-232-81.unity-media.net) joined #forth 19:10:38 how are you loading your Forth onto the calculator? 19:10:52 because I presume you aren't tapping in all the hex 19:11:13 does the TI-84 have something analogous to JTAG? 19:11:28 --- nick: Keshl_ -> Keshl 19:11:35 --- quit: jn__ (Disconnected by services) 19:11:50 --- nick: jn___ -> jn__ 19:23:57 --- join: dave0 (~dave@90.20.215.218.dyn.iprimus.net.au) joined #forth 19:24:09 re 19:25:01 --- quit: tabemann (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 19:30:46 tabemann: There's an assembler and a "TI Connect" program on the computer to transfer it to the calculator. 19:32:22 tabemann, its not flashing a chip like jtag. the calculator has a simple file ststem 20:00:20 --- join: wa5qjh (~quassel@175.158.225.193) joined #forth 20:00:20 --- quit: wa5qjh (Changing host) 20:00:20 --- join: wa5qjh (~quassel@freebsd/user/wa5qjh) joined #forth 20:01:36 --- join: tabemann (~tabemann@2602:30a:c0d3:1890:d004:a860:b5ff:7c1c) joined #forth 20:04:36 --- join: [1]MrMobius (~default@c-73-134-82-217.hsd1.va.comcast.net) joined #forth 20:07:19 --- quit: dave0 (Quit: dave's not here) 20:08:13 --- quit: MrMobius (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) 20:08:13 --- nick: [1]MrMobius -> MrMobius 21:17:01 I found an actual use for mutexes, aside from those for the IO manager, in my Forth 21:17:26 namely, to prevent different tasks from interfering with one another while attempting to access the terminal 21:18:13 namely so that the task with the interactive session does not have its control codes scrambled by another thread also printing text to the terminal 21:19:38 --- join: dave0 (~dave@90.20.215.218.dyn.iprimus.net.au) joined #forth 21:24:35 --- join: rdrop-exit (~markwilli@112.201.162.180) joined #forth 21:34:55 tabemann: you could just have one task handle all terminal I/O 22:30:37 --- quit: pierpal (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) 22:55:59 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 22:57:53 --- quit: pierpal (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 22:59:44 --- join: pierpal (~pierpal@host247-234-dynamic.18-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) joined #forth 23:50:17 --- join: xek (~xek@apn-31-0-23-81.dynamic.gprs.plus.pl) joined #forth 23:59:31 --- quit: xek (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/18.10.24