00:00:00 --- log: started forth/21.04.08 01:01:31 --- join: f-a joined #forth 01:47:30 --- quit: proteus-guy (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 02:22:29 --- quit: f-a (Quit: leaving) 04:10:58 --- join: tech_exorcist joined #forth 04:43:26 --- quit: crest_ (Quit: https://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.) 04:49:20 --- quit: Vedran (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 04:49:41 --- join: crest joined #forth 04:49:46 --- join: Vedran joined #forth 05:02:35 --- join: f-a joined #forth 05:32:28 --- quit: f-a (Quit: leaving) 05:49:08 --- quit: tech_exorcist (Quit: tech_exorcist) 05:49:44 --- join: tech_exorcist joined #forth 06:14:51 --- join: f-a joined #forth 06:30:19 --- quit: neuro_sys (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) 06:34:22 --- quit: f-a (Quit: leaving) 07:18:13 --- join: f-a joined #forth 07:52:16 It's not often that important these days, but in a case like sectorforth I think that's a valuable find, dave0. Nice. 07:56:36 --- join: lispmacs joined #forth 08:25:44 Ha ha ha - for the first time in a LONG time I just weighed in under 200. 198.8. :-) 08:51:24 --- quit: f-a (Quit: leaving) 09:51:39 --- join: f-a joined #forth 09:59:49 --- quit: dave0 (Quit: dave's not here) 10:25:26 --- quit: f-a (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 10:28:26 --- join: f-a joined #forth 11:39:37 --- quit: gravicappa (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) 11:41:42 --- join: gravicappa joined #forth 12:42:58 KipIngram: Keep it up buddy 13:12:09 --- join: WickedShell joined #forth 13:14:30 --- quit: WickedShell (Remote host closed the connection) 13:15:19 --- quit: gravicappa (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) 13:20:16 --- join: WickedShell joined #forth 13:27:15 --- quit: boru (Ping timeout: 268 seconds) 13:27:47 --- join: boru joined #forth 13:31:10 --- join: Zarutian_HTC joined #forth 13:37:19 --- join: yyyyyy joined #forth 13:37:45 --- quit: yyyyyy (Remote host closed the connection) 13:38:39 --- join: yyyyyy joined #forth 13:39:25 --- quit: yyyyyy (Remote host closed the connection) 13:42:15 --- join: yyyyyy joined #forth 13:42:37 h'lo folks 13:43:13 lo 13:43:59 I have probably described this technique of having primitives expressed with leeding zeros in their cell 13:45:05 for instance I have the sixteen most primitives 0x0 to 0xF 13:45:40 then I have more complex primitives in 0x10 to 0xFF 13:47:40 but I have arranged so that there are ?jump? vectors at those addresses 0x10-0xFF that jump to implementation/colon-word that implement these more complex primitives using the minimal set or less complex primitives 13:48:06 --- part: f-a left #forth 13:48:49 a sort of fallback for those environments that do not implement all or only few of the more complex primitives 14:05:46 Reading about COBOL today 14:06:57 Better you than me, man. 14:12:02 I find eldritch FORTRAN the hardest to read honestly 14:12:29 I wonder if any of Forth was inspired by COBOL 14:20:03 I don't know if I really understand COBOL at all, but I always got the impression it was heavily about printing reports. 14:20:20 Like financial reports. 14:20:29 Tables, etc. 14:20:58 it was basically like excell via scripting iirc 14:21:46 for making, weekly sales reports, quartly earnings report, invoices et ceterata 14:22:56 s/excell/excel/ 14:24:47 That's basically what Forth is though right 14:27:30 What I'm getting from reading this COBOL manual is noticing a lot of potential influences for different languages like Forth, C, etc. Although I don't know other languages from the era that well to compare 14:31:59 Forth was originally for scientifoc instrument controll iirc 14:32:24 Algol influenced Cobol iirc 14:33:04 and Algol also influenced many other programming languages in that era 14:33:57 Forth wasn't created in a vacuum, there would have been some influences 14:34:36 COBOL seems to have something that's pretty similar to the Forth dictionary 14:35:33 Algol, FORTRAN, Lisp and COBOL are the big four influential early programming languages 14:36:46 Zarutian_HTC: this very unscientific diagram disagrees a bit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALGOL#/media/File:Algol&Fortran_family-by-Borkowski.svg 14:37:48 I don't think early COBOL was influenced by Algol much at all, I don't think it was on their radar. They even invented their own syntax for defining syntax, even though backus form had been created for Algol before they specified COBOL 14:38:21 lot of the ideas that ended up in these four languages were being discussed at the time 14:39:38 Cobol doesnt even pretend to implement Algol syntax but some of the ideas were probably cross polinated 14:40:22 but I am no computer historian 14:41:56 As I was just saying it wasn't on their radar, maybe there was a very minor amount of cross polination 14:42:26 COBOL seems to be mainly based on FLOW-MATIC 14:45:14 It's much more refined though 14:45:35 --- quit: Zarutian_HTC (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 14:45:47 --- join: Zarutian_HTC joined #forth 14:57:31 I wonder if this is where "File descriptor" came from too 15:04:33 --- quit: shmorgle (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) 15:06:31 I've got to guess we've got COBOL to thank for Intel's MOV instruction 15:06:46 Because the assignment verb is MOVE 15:14:05 https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_codasylCOB_6843924 15:21:40 --- quit: cantstanya (Remote host closed the connection) 15:28:09 --- join: cantstanya joined #forth 15:31:27 that instruction is turing complete 15:32:08 though there are a few various addressing modes that need to be taken into account 15:32:38 basically the cpu becomes an register to register machine 15:33:00 I'm reading Backus' Speedcoding article 15:33:48 "Once a problem is coded one can often have it punched, checked out on the 701, and ready to run inside of an hour or two." 15:35:22 the joy of batch processing 15:35:40 no wonder interactive repls are so aluring 15:39:33 This is from 1953 and uses floating point, I didn't realise floating point was that old! 15:39:51 Well I suppose it's older than computers really 15:40:02 But I mean in a computer 15:41:04 depends on which floating point number scheme 15:41:25 Why 15:42:09 mantissa x pow(2, exponent) wasnt that of a streach from scientific notation 15:42:29 That's what I mean by older than computers 15:42:51 some of the most simplest one did not have nan, neginfinity, or posinfinity 15:43:02 Neither does pen and paper 15:43:11 --- quit: tech_exorcist (Quit: tech_exorcist) 15:43:17 or abacus 15:43:21 The calculations are the same, just using binary rather than decimal. Although some older computers used decimal, like the decatron 15:44:05 The C standard for instance doesn't require -inf or +inf or a binary representation 15:44:13 the precision loss and such isnt the same between bases 15:44:46 Yes but I mean the algorithms are the same, with different numbers for base, but of course technically the rounding is different.... 15:45:33 talking about floating point math 15:46:54 been fidling with using delta sigma based digital signal processing instead of the usual multiply accumulate inside a tight loop paradigm 15:56:39 "One documented application, authored by Laning and Zierler themselves, involved a problem in aeronautics. The problem required seven systems of differential equations to express, and had been given to the Whirlwind because..." 15:56:43 "...it was too large for MIT's Differential Analyzer to handle. The authors, exploiting the Runge-Kutta feature of their programming system, produced a 97-statement program in two and half hours. The program ran successfully the first time." 16:19:19 --- join: jess joined #forth 16:21:45 --- join: dave0 joined #forth 16:22:20 maw 16:24:11 --- quit: yyyyyy (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 17:16:34 I was reading a style guide, and one of the instructions was to not abbreviate any words, and I think they gave "cos" as an example and said to use "cosine" 17:16:41 If it's good enough for Euler it's good enough for your programs! 17:28:01 heh 17:28:14 i whole heartedly DISAGREE and agrree at the same time 17:28:38 however, using complete sentences for function/variable names is pure, unadulterated idiocty 17:29:15 void fetch_next_random_item_so_we_can_populate_the_structure_wtih_random_data(void) 17:29:15 { 17:29:16 } 17:29:35 oopts. forgot "THE" in that name! 17:30:12 i think terse names as long as the meaning is obvious should be the norm 17:30:37 or should we call I and J outer_loop_index and innter_loop_index too? 17:32:39 Someone in ##fortran pointed out euler's identity would not look good if it was written out like that with english words 17:33:03 I agree mark4 17:38:17 --- quit: Zarutian_HTC (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 17:40:39 --- join: Zarutian_HTC joined #forth 18:37:22 --- join: boru` joined #forth 18:37:25 --- quit: boru (Disconnected by services) 18:37:27 --- nick: boru` -> boru 18:48:57 --- quit: Zarutian_HTC (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) 18:54:22 --- join: Zarutian_HTC joined #forth 19:23:49 --- quit: WickedShell (Remote host closed the connection) 20:20:38 Long function names are a blight 20:21:11 SchedulingProcessorExecutorInjectionService kill me 21:24:12 --- join: shmorgle joined #forth 21:42:07 --- join: gravicappa joined #forth 22:42:44 For those of you who missed it last night - you can see the replay of our product beta launch here: https://youtu.be/LDZFybcPnco?t=3544 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/21.04.08