HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Martin Ertl)
Subject: Re: +LOOP in the Standard
Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 08:22:30 GMT

I just noted another glitch connected to +LOOP with negative
increments:

-2 0 ?DO -1 +LOOP	loops 3 times
-1 0 ?DO -1 +LOOP	loops 2 times
 0 0 ?DO -1 +LOOP	loops 0 times

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl                    Some things have to be seen to be believed
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Martin Ertl)
Subject: Re: Down with free Forth systems.
Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 09:54:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.233956.27151@crd.ge.com>, eaker@ukulele.crd.ge.com (Chuck Eaker) writes:
|> Both C and Pascal were both developed by teams of professionals whose
|> jobs were to create such things.

Not really. Their jobs were to do research (C) and research and
teaching (Pascal). Even if they produce working software in their
jobs, the quality of this software may be very low. It's only purpose
is proof of concept. So, if they chose to build a usable compiler and
support it, they were in a similar situation to any free software
author.

While it was not their proper job to do such things, they were
highly-qualified computer scientists (even if they made their degrees
in EE etc.:-), which probably had a good influence on the quality of
the product. And the quality of the implementation makes the
difference in the popularity of a language, not whether a vendor can
make a profit.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl                    Some things have to be seen to be believed
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Forth in the Marketplace
Date: 30 Jul 92 12:33:46 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U

Category 2,  Topic 11
Message 111       Thu Jul 30, 1992
ELLIOTT.C                    at 08:01 EDT
 
Try this on for a slogan -

Forth - the hands-on language.

-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us
From: mikeh@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Michael Hore)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Mops
Date: 27 Jul 92 10:33:39 GMT
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32


Doug Philips writes:

(original posting deleted)

>I certainly hope you reduce the size of the release.  700K+ is outrageous.
>Perhaps you could produce two releases, binary only and source only?
>(Many PC packages are available that way).

This is a good idea, and next time I'll certainly do something along
those lines.  I've only been on-line for 8 months, so my understanding
of what is appropriate and what is not in an on-line package is
still somewhat underdeveloped.  Sorry for any inconvenience.

I'll probably have to split the manual too, as it grows.  So it looks
like we'll end up with:

(1) source
(2) binaries
(3) manual1
(4) manual2

or something like that.

Cheers,  Mike.     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Hore     GEnie:       M.HORE
              internet:    mikeh@kralizec.zeta.org.au
"Wisdom has never been known to enter the head through an open mouth"
-- overheard somewhere.
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: ANS TC Magnet for ROMability
Date: 23 Jul 92 11:56:57 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U

Category 10,  Topic 22
Message 68        Thu Jul 23, 1992
D.RUFFER [Dennis]            at 01:51 EDT
 
Re: B.RODRIGUEZ2 [Brad]

 > Dennis: I'm not worried about cross-compilers producing an ANS
 > Standard System; I'm worried about cross-compilers accepting ANS
 > Standard Programs.

I see, but sorry, I _never_ assumed that an ANS Standard Program could be
cross compiled with no implementation dependancies.  Just as I don't assume
that I can cross compile a "normal" application, I have always assumed that
some "minor modifications" would be needed before I can cross compile
anything.  Although it might be "nice" to be able to cover this transition in
the standard, it is hardly necessary and I doubt it is even possible.  I
certainly have never seen a system where I _could_ do it.

   {B-{)>   DaR
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Distant Drums
Date: 21 Jul 92 12:27:35 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U

Category 14,  Topic 8
Message 85        Tue Jul 21, 1992
B.RODRIGUEZ2 [Brad]          at 01:06 EDT
 
Hmmm...I would think that distributing a poll via Usenet would guarantee a
biased sample.  How many COBOL programmers will respond?

Brad Rodriguez
 B.RODRIGUEZ2 on GEnie   |   bradford@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca
 So many projects....so little time.

-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us
From: ztsindi@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (The Independents - SUNY Buffalo)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Apple II Forth Users New and Old?
Date: 30 Jul 92 04:23:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


	Howsy!
		I've been falling in love with forth recently (they 
look at me funny at the diner when I take it to dinner). I'd like to
hack away with it on my trusty old Apple IIgs thats sitting at home. 
Could someone please review any forth implementations for the IIgs
both 8 and 16 bit? And are there any ftp sites for forth screens? AND,
does anyone out there have or know where I can get some forth source
and programs for the Apple II version(s) of Forth? Since Forth is
so small and fast it should be fun to go back to my II and do some
Forthing on it! 
						Thanx All,
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Forth in the Marketplace
Date: 30 Jul 92 21:52:37 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

ELLIOTT.C writes:

> Try this on for a slogan -
> 
> Forth - the hands-on language.

Aaagh!  Nooo!  The first thing that comes to mind is religious evangelist con
men and "laying on of hands".  To modify a "Far Side" image slightly, picture a
man placing his hands on a computer and saying "Let our faith in Forth drive
out the demons that crash this program!"

  :-)

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Martin Ertl)
Subject: Re: Non-Forth systems/languages.
Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 08:46:57 GMT

In article <1992Jul20.180116.5853@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE>, pazsan@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Bernd Paysan) writes:
|> 
|> In article <3898.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>, ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) writes:
|> |> Category 3,  Topic 16
|> |> Message 84        Fri Jul 17, 1992
|> |> E.RATHER [Elizabeth]         at 00:01 EDT
|> |>  
|> |> In our experience w/ "funny chips" the way to really get performance out of a
|> |> strange architecture is to design the Forth machine to take as much advantage
|> |> of the architecture as possible internally. For example, on the i860 we use a
|> |> modified dtc in which the 1st instruction of the "jumped to" code actually
|> |> follows the jump in the calling def, because the pipelining enables that
|> |> instruction to be executed "for free" during the jump.  It's unclear whether
|> |> writing the code in C as Ertl has done can facilitate that type of
|> |> optimization.
|> 
|> At least the code for HP-PA doesn't, but it doesn't run, either :-(. It compiles
|> NEXT DTC as
|> 
|>         ldws,ma 4(0,%r20),%r19
|>         bv 0(%r19)
|>         nop
|> 
|> and adds a nop to the pipeline. The SPARC code added the increment of the pointer
|> in the branch delay, but I don't have it here now, so I can't post it. The
|> ldws,ma increments the pointer, so nothing was found to fit into the pipeline 
|> (and I can't find anything by hand, too). The NEXT ITC is quite the same:
|> 
|>         ldws,ma 4(0,%r20),%r19
|>         ldw 0(0,%r19),%r19
|>         bv 0(%r19)
|>         nop

What you don't see is the delay slots between the load and the use of
the loaded value in the next instruction. However, in a real forth
primitive these delay slots will be filled (and the nop after the
branch will be replaced) with other instructions (for computing and
stack manipulation). This is done automatically by the C compiler.

There is one possible optimization that I don't know how to express in
GNU C. You can draw the load of the next execution token into the
previous primitive, where it can fill the branch delay slot, i.e.:

NEXT DTC
        bv 0(%r19)
        ldws,ma 4(0,%r20),%r19

This would reduce cache miss sensitivity and may reduce delay slots in
some primitives. On the other hand, loading the next instruction
will be wasted effort in at least 25% of the executed instructions
(CALL and EXIT), so this "optimization" may backfire. It probably will
pay off in processors of the next generation, which have many delay
slots. So perhaps GNU C will give us another extension for expressing
such things.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl                    Some things have to be seen to be believed
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: erwin@cs.kun.nl (Erwin Donderdorp)
Subject: Parallel Forth's
Summary: how to parallel compute in Forth
Keywords: parallel computing, Forth
Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 00:53:13 GMT

Hi,

We are working with our own ANS Forth implementation for the INMOS
transputer and (among other things) we are experimenting with parallel
computing.
Our main problem is that Forth is in the category of incremental
compilers. This makes the standard implementation of multiprocessing a
bit difficult. (The easy way is to first flood your program around the
whole network and then start computing). Because each tranputer may
decide to load more code a scheme where only program counters are
communicated is useless. Currently we are thinking of sending simple
forth commands to each node but we think it is too slow for real use.
Have there been any discussions about this subject?

Erwin Dondorp

(P.S. This is more or less a private project, itoes not involve the
above mentionned university!)
From: esj@harvee.UUCP (Eric S Johansson)
Subject: Re: ANS figFORTH
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Date: 21 Jul 92 22:16:44 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: gators 'r us
X-Version: Rodney's UUCP modules 02/11/90 V1.18

In article <l6lr0pINNsvk@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> wmb@pi.Eng.Sun.COM
(Mitch Bradley) writes:
> References: <1992Jul15.115912.9846@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE>
> > We'll hope to get volunteers to join the group, so that we'll get not just
> > another Forth, but THE Forth of the 90th!
> 
> ... thus further eroding the ability of Forth vendors to make a profit,
> thus ensuring that Forth will forever be relegated to a hobbyist language
> or an academic curiosity.
> 
> Down with free Forth systems.

the perpetual sore point between free forths and pay forths will not go
away as long as free forths "outperform" pay forths.  I argue that
the real (lasting?) solution to this problem is to use the free forths
as a baseline for customer expectations.  Then as a forth vendor, you
must provide some type of added value to make it worth spending money
on your forth.

look at what is happening in the C compiler world with advent of the
GNU compiler suite.  the GNU compiler is the one to beat in terms
of performance, code generation, portability, and support.  The
forth world has been going throught that trauma for many years, we
just didn't know it :-)

to traumatize an already abused quote, stand on the shoulders of
free forths not on their toes.  while you're at it, don't let them stand
on your toes either...

---eric "free is good, free+value added is better"
--
HOME: UUCP ...!uunet!wang!harvee!esj esj@harvee.uucp  HAM  ka1eec
WORK: 617.630.4687 (w)   johansson@athena.polaroid.com
source of the public's fear of the unknown since 1956
From: eaker@ukulele.crd.ge.com (Charles E Eaker)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Down with free Forth systems.
Date: 25 Jul 92 03:19:45 GMT
Reply-To: eaker@ukulele.crd.ge.com
Organization: GE CR&D Computer Science Program

In article <1992Jul24.095451.4815@email.tuwien.ac.at>, anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Martin Ertl) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul22.233956.27151@crd.ge.com>, eaker@ukulele.crd.ge.com (Chuck Eaker) writes:
|> |> Both C and Pascal were both developed by teams of professionals whose
|> |> jobs were to create such things.
|> 
|> Not really. Their jobs were to do research (C) and research and
|> teaching (Pascal).
... etc.

I agree, but they were not a group of volunteers. In both cases lots of bucks
were paid to people in salaries, and to vendors for hardware and other resources.
Very little of which had to be paid for (in one of those rare hiccups in the
universe) by the user community, initially.
Without at least that kind of investment, nothing as successful as C or Pascal
will be produced today. And most certainly not through volunteered time and resources.

From where I sit, it seems unlikely that another language will come along anytime
soon to which people will beat a path as they did to FORTRAN, COBOL, C, Pascal,
Ada, and C++. It will have to be a language (or, more likely, an environment
such as Unix or Motif) that provides far more leverage than Forth can ever
hope to provide. Unless, as I said, something happens to Forth so that I can
use it to help me do things faster and easier on the kinds of projects I work
on. For massive aerospace projects, for example, no one will ever accept Forth
as the target language. That doesn't mean I can't use it as a tool to increase
my productivity. Some vendor is going to have to add unthinkable amounts of
value to Forth for that to happen.

In short, I don't think a volunteer effort to produce Yet Another Better
Forth will succeed. I'm also saddened at the prospect of so much energy
being directed at YABF instead of other things that would be far more valuable
in promoting Forth.

-- 
Chuck Eaker / P.O. Box 8, K-1 3C12 / Schenectady, NY 12301 USA
eaker@crd.ge.com        eaker@crdgw1.UUCP       (518) 387-5964
From: willett.pgh.pa.us!dwp@overmind.mind.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Mops
Date: 22 Jul 92 18:37:00 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U
X-mailer: Stadel 3.4a-227
X-Spam-content: irrelevant

In article <3930.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
 M.HORE [Mike] writes:

+BTW, in future releases of Mops I may not include all the binaries in the
+release, to save download time, since the package is now so big.  In other
+words, the procedure for compiling the system above the nucleus will 
probably
+become the normal practice.  It's not hard to do (I hope you all agree!!)

I certainly hope you reduce the size of the release.  700K+ is outrageous.
Perhaps you could produce two releases, binary only and source only?
(Many PC packages are available that way).

-Doug
---
Preferred:  dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us Ok:  {pitt,sei}!willett!dwp
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: hall@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (John Hall)
Subject: Forth for the market place
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 04:06:54 GMT



          A quick note to get ideas turning.
 
          In our local newspaper ( the Sydney Morning Herald 20/7/92 ),
          there was a cover article stating that " The Chip " is taking
          away jobs. It goes on to say that we need more people who know
          how to interact with machines, not as an apendage but as an
          intergrated part. What better language could one ask for than
          Forth! With its quick interactivness, it is a perfect vessel to
          spearhead the community into the next work place generation.
 
          Forth's adaptation to variables is quick and can be performed
          without the need for lengthy compiling. In fact the underlying
          code can stay invisable, yet still allow full use of the
          program.
 
          As with most success stories, we need to get the young involved.
          If kids took home small projects (and completed them), Mum and
          Dad would realise that their investment wasn't just an expensive
          dust collector or "add-on" games machine. The projects need to
          fire children's imagination, stimulating their desire to explore
          the language's capacity.  
           
          Forth must push its way into this ideal market of interactivity
          between people and machines. To do this, Forth has to be shown
          as an easy to use "tool", that has the power to bring us a more
          intelligent way of life. When Charles Moore first created this
          language, his view of the heavens expanded. It's now up to us to
          encourage the use of this language, to fulfill our destiny and
          touch the stars.
 

Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: mikeh@starnine.com (Mike Haas)
Subject: Re: Looking for Object Oriented Forth..
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 02:03:02 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: StarNine Technologies, Inc.

In article <JKH.92Jul24173952@sparc3.lotus.com> jkh@sparc3.lotus.com (Jordan K Hubbard) writes:
|Hi.  I've heard of Neon, but from what I know of it, it's available only
|on the Macintosh.  Is there any other forth out there, especially publically
|available, that one could use to show OOP weenies that forth isn't totally
|lost when in comes to programming in such a model?
|
|				Jordan

JForth Professional on the Amiga has an OOP extension called ODE...Object
Development Environment.

It supports late-binding, multiple-inheritence, etc.  And JForth's
CLONE standalone-application-generator works fine on it's programs.
From: bevan@cs.man.ac.uk (Stephen J Bevan)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Writing Text Editors in Forth
Date: 21 Jul 92 08:05:05 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester
In-reply-to: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us's message of 19 Jul 92 13:29:57 GMT

In article <3919.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us> ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) writes:
   Category 3,  Topic 29
   Message 31        Sat Jul 18, 1992
   E.RATHER [Elizabeth]         at 17:18 EDT

   RE using 2 monitors on a PC:
      We do this regularly, both for programming and applications.  In control
   systems, [deleted]
      I'm not sure why nobody else (outside Forth) seems to do this.

This isn't a FORTH vs. non-FORTH issue.  My brother "does" control
systems using various proprietry languages, (no FORTH :-(), and
regularly uses two monitors.  Also two monitors can come in handy when
doing heavy duty graphics work.  However, for anybody who has access
to a machine with a decent screen resolution (>= 1M pixel) and a
decent window system (fill in your favourite), there seems little
advantage in multiple monitors.

bevan
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: us048503@mmm.serc.3m.com (Art H. Hurst)
Subject: Re: ANS figFORTH
Keywords: ANS, fig, implementation
Organization: 3M Company
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 16:02:38 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.141150.19600@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> mikc@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mike Coughlin) writes:
>   Bill Gates sells things like BASIC and a primitive operating system.
>He's worth $6,500,000,000 depending on the value of Microsoft stock.
>Its clear that Forth is better than BASIC. How did Forth vendors let 
>him get away with that?
	They didn't, he just studied P. T. Barnum --- real good!!

-- 
Art Hurst                                         Email: ahhurst@mmm.com
3M Company                                        Phone: (805)388-4170
Digital Storage Products Division                 FAX:   (805)388-4804
Camarillo CA 93012
From: nick@sw.stratus.com (Nicolas Tamburri)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: ANS figFORTH
Keywords: ANS, fig, implementation
Date: 21 Jul 92 13:10:20 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

wmb@pi.Eng.Sun.COM (Mitch Bradley) writes:
> 
> ... thus further eroding the ability of Forth vendors to make a profit,
> thus ensuring that Forth will forever be relegated to a hobbyist language
> or an academic curiosity.
> 
> Down with free Forth systems.
> 
> Mitch

I understand your sentiment, but I don't agree with you.  From personal
experience, I've bought a bunch of Forth implementations (yours included,)
to run on Atari 8-bitters, an Amiga and a Mac.  I would probably not have
bought any, had I not been introduced to Forth via freebie Forths on each
platform.  (The first hit is always free I guess. :-)

We keep talking about re-inventing the wheel here in Forth-land, and we all
know that as soon as ANSI Forth is approved and hits the street, everybody
that has written a public domain Forth will either write an ANSI compatible
one, or upgrade their existing package to be ANSI compatable.  I'd rather
see all that effort go into developing tools and libraries for one widely
available ANSI Forth, than to have a dozens of widely available ANSI Forths
which all have the same minimum level of functionality.

Since there doesn't seem to be any chance that any type of internal
standardization will happen, the next best thing, (for me anyway,) if I'm
interested in portability, is to rely on a common, widely-available,
platform existing on all my target machines.  I can then use my favorite
platform for development, but target my code for ultimate compilation by
the freebie system, and be confident of its availabilty and compatability
on diverse machines.  Without this ability, I'd probably resort to doing
the project in C, since I can count on C being pretty much available on all
platforms.  I'd like to see this be true for Forth as well.

Finally,  vendors will always be able to tout their
'direct-jsr-threaded-inline-peephole-optimized' Forth languages with the
nifty development systems as being superior to the public-domain version.
This is wehere the real selling point to Forth systems is anyway,  the Forth
engine itself may as well be given away for free.

							/nt