HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dmiller@im.lcs.mit.edu (Dick and Jill Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: C assembler
Date: 15 Oct 1992 10:04:02 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

zmola@bert.eecs.uic.edu (Carl Zmola) writes re "C assembler":
>         I've always wanted to link into C-libraries with forth,
> and use forth as an interactive development platform.  I have 
> played with TILE, but I am looking for a c based forth which
> can be compiled for dos, so that I can run it under windows.
> 
>         I am not to concerned with features as they can be added, but
> would prefer someone elses code as a platform on which to start.
> TILE compiles easily with GCC for 386 dos, after removeing the words which
> access unix based multiprocessing.  Does someone have a simple kernel
> (or system ) written in C?  I really want something I can get up quick
> and then play with.
 
Carl, one simple Forth which may meet your needs is Until, written in C by 
Norm Smith of Oak Ridge, TN.  Norm is selling his book on it for $15.  I'll 
know more about it after attending his talk at the upcoming Boston FIG 
meeting, Wednesday evening October 28th.
 
Meanwhile, Norm might be able to answer some of your questions himself.  
You can ask him on InterNet: smithn@orvb.saic.com
 
I hope this helps.
 
--Dick Miller
 
A. Richard & Jill A. Miller            | Miller Microcomputer Services |
InterNet: dmiller@im.lcs.mit.edu       | 61 Lake Shore Road            |
Voice: 508/653-6136, 9am-9pm EasternTZ | Natick, MA 01760-2099, USA    | 
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: jax@well.sf.ca.us (Jack J. Woehr)
Subject: Re: Where is FPC 3.56?
Keywords: fpc
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 04:03:36 GMT

In <1992Oct14.223240.11524@techbook.com> lowell@techbook.com (Lowell Brunson) writes:

>Sorry for the faq but where can I find fpc 3.56 other than on genie?

Lowell --

	On the Realtime Control & Forth Board, of course!

	Number in .signature below \/\/\/\/
-- 
 # jax@well.{UUCP,sf.ca.us}  # #  Member  # # Vice President,       #
 # du!isis!koscej!jax        # # X3J14 TC # #  Forth Interest Group #
 # JAX on GEnie              # # for ANS  # #   P.O. Box 8231       #
 # SYSOP RCFB (303) 278-0364 # #  Forth   # #    San Jose CA 95155  #
From: dashiell@NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL ("", A. Kaniss)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: z80 cpu's and forth
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:55:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: nettlera.9210152147.AA07261
Reply-To: FIGI-L%BRUSPVM.BITNET@cmsa.Berkeley.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet

I have some questions.  I've never heard of sam coupe
computers.  I have though an ampro little board series 100 machine at home
which also runs a z80 processor.  This computer also runs under
cp/m 2.2.  If your operating system is also cp/m 2.2 I have
some additional questions for you.  In my ampro computer there was a program
that came with it called multidsk.com which if I remember properly
made the ampro able to access some other different disk formats of other
cp/m machines.  Do you have a program similar to that?
If so, what other types of formats will your machine read when
it is running that program?  We may have a common format.  If that's the
case it might be possible to use snail mail to get you some disks with an
implementation of f83 on them.

jude <dashiell@nadc.nadc.navy.mil>
From: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: FIG library reductions?  (Was I caught napping?)
Date: 8 Oct 92 16:37:10 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U

I just got around to looking at Forth Dimensions Volume XIV, Number 3 (the
Sept/Oct 92 issue).

What has happened to FIG's library?

FIG is _NOT_ going to be keeping BACK issues of Forth Dimensions?
FIG is _NOT_ going to be keeping BACK issues of FORML Conference proceedings?

The "catalog" for the FIG library no longer lists JFARs either?

Did I miss something, an announcement, or whatever, in a recent issue?

What is going on here?

-Doug

P.S.  Yes, perhaps I have not carefully read the FIG catalog in every
issue.  I would never have guessed that FIG would stop stocking back issues
of its own flagship publication!
---
Preferred:  dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us	Ok:  {pitt,sei}!willett!dwp
From: C588212@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: WinForth, where are you???
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:07:07 GMT
Reply-To: FIGI-L%BRUSPVM.BITNET@cmsa.Berkeley.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet

I have heard of a forth called WinForth for the MS-Window environment.  I have
tried to find it on BBS and Internet with no luck.  Last I heard it was in
Beta, but that was around March.  I never heard if it was comercial or
shareware or freeware.  If anyone has such divine knowledge, give the listserve
a note.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Martin Ertl)
Subject: Re: An Open ANSI Forth Implementation
Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:34:38 GMT

In article <H.f5CtajwYbto@harvee.billerica.ma.us>, esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us (Eric S Johansson) writes:
|> You can bypass the access and maintenance issues by using the time 
|> honored techinque of generating C as your high-level assembler code.
|> Or if you are feeling more hyper, you could rip open GCC and feed RTL 
|> into the code generator.

Right, but the system would not be interactive. This is ok for a
special-purpose product, but ANSI figForth's goal is to be "The Forth
of the 90s".

- 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: PYGMY Forth
Date: 8 Oct 92 11:18:53 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U

Category 7,  Topic 22
Message 118       Wed Oct 07, 1992
ELLIOTT.C                    at 08:49 EDT
 
 -----via CRS Premium Bulletin Board - USR Dual Standard 16.8K
 (416) 629-7000
 Date: 10-04-92 (05:23)
   To: B.RODRIGUEZ2 [BRAD]
 From: IAN WATTERS
 Subj: Cross versus re-

 B[>> * Origin: GEnie and the Forth Interest Group via The
 GrapeVine BBS

 B[>>BTW, I think Stephen Pelc has devised a useful nomenclature
   for metacompile >>a "cross-compiler" can produce code for a
   different CPU.  A "recompiler" -->>e.g. Pygmy -- can simply
   regenerate the kernel for the host CPU; it can't >>produce
   code for a new CPU.

 I can't see why Pygmy's metacompiler couldn't be made into a
 cross-compiler...  The target's words are never executed, so
 just have a Forth assember for another CPU and write them in
 that.

   //\/\/

  * OLX 2.2 * My tagline's s
                            lipped !
 ---
  * O.L.E.F. BBS.  London UK. +44-81-882-9808
  * PostLink(tm) v1.01  OLEF (#181) : RelayNet (tm).

 PCRelay:RUNNINGA -> #2 RelayNet (tm)
 4.11                The Running Board * 301 229-5342 * MD


-----
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.mac
From: vaitl@ucselx.sdsu.edu (Eric Vaitl)
Subject: public domain 68000 forth assembler?
Summary: pointer needed to a forth 68000 asembler
Keywords: 68000 assembler
Organization: SDSU Computing Services
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 01:33:28 GMT

The subject line says it all. I'm not a mac person, but I've ported
eforth to a 68030 single board computer. The long term project goal is
to write a unix like kernel in forth. The next step is to get an
assembler up and running. Can anybody here give me a pointer on where
to look?

Thanks.
Eric Vaitl
vaitl@ucselx.sdsu.edu



Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth.mac
From: jax@well.sf.ca.us (Jack J. Woehr)
Subject: Re: public domain 68000 forth assembler?
Keywords: 68000 assembler
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 07:39:37 GMT

In <1992Oct10.013328.4433@ucselx.sdsu.edu> vaitl@ucselx.sdsu.edu (Eric Vaitl) writes:


>The next step is to get an
>assembler up and running. Can anybody here give me a pointer on where
>to look?

	Eric ...

	Laxen and Perry's F83 for the 68000 CP/M is one.

	Derived from that, but 32-bit is Appelman's A4TH for the
Amiga.

	Both are available from my BBS, number in .sig below \/\/\/\/
-- 
 # jax@well.{UUCP,sf.ca.us}  # #  Member  # # Vice President,       #
 # du!isis!koscej!jax        # # X3J14 TC # #  Forth Interest Group #
 # JAX on GEnie              # # for ANS  # #   P.O. Box 8231       #
 # SYSOP RCFB (303) 278-0364 # #  Forth   # #    San Jose CA 95155  #
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth.mac
Subject: re: public domain 68000 assembler
From: mentink@wronz.org.nz
Date: 13 Oct 92 07:59:50 +1300

eric vaitl writes,

:The subject line says it all. I'm not a mac person, but I've ported
:eforth to a 68030 single board computer. The long term project goal is
:to write a unix like kernel in forth. The next step is to get an
:assembler up and running. Can anybody here give me a pointer on where
:to look?

:Thanks.
:Eric Vaitl
:vaitl@ucselx.sdsu.edu

eric,

	I have a Motorola Freeware assembler for the 68332 controller
chip that is an extension of the 68000 code. Please reply to my email
address and I will email it to you.
By the way I have sucsesfully ported eforth to the Hitachi H8/532
microcontroller and am constantly adding new words.
I would like to here from you as to what you are up to.
Question: Do you know how to implement the CREATE DOES> construct in
eforth?
Anyhow have fun.

Regards

Bernie Mentink
W.R.O.N.Z
email: mentink@wronz.org.nz
From: hm342st@uni-duisburg.de (Joerg Plewe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth.mac
Subject: Re: public domain 68000 forth assembler?
Date: 12 Oct 92 09:34:51 GMT
Organization: Universitaet Duisburg GH
Distribution: world
Reply-To: plewe@mpi-dortmund.mpg.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: duc220.uni-duisburg.de
Keywords: 68000 assembler


In <1992Oct10.013328.4433@ucselx.sdsu.edu> vaitl@ucselx.sdsu.edu (Eric Vaitl) writes:

>The subject line says it all. I'm not a mac person, but I've ported
>eforth to a 68030 single board computer. The long term project goal is
>to write a unix like kernel in forth. The next step is to get an
>assembler up and running. Can anybody here give me a pointer on where
>to look?

I can offer you one implementation of the Laxen&Perry assembler adapted
to a 32 bit system.  It is part of my own development system called
F68K.  I distribute it as freeware (or so) and you are allowed to strip
anything you need out of it (e.g.  a nearly finished 680x0
disassembler or a BLOCK-based filesystem!). 

The L&P assembler is 68000 only.  I have some simple 68881/2 extensions
in 32 bit not adapted to F68K, but to another system.


If you to have or just see these things, send a mail for details!
Perhaps you like F68K just the way it is.  It is very portable an
generating native code!


	-Joerg Plewe



Reply-To: plewe@mpi-dortmund.mpg.de
From: mikc@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mike Coughlin)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Forth will Replace C
Date: 16 Oct 92 04:42:28 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization

>I always thought, that assembly language is a write only language; and the
>typical comment is
>
>ADD	AX,BX	;Add BX to AX :-)
>
>because no assembly programmer seems to look at the next line (and not
>everybody knows that Intel uses reverse register notation).
>
>Unlike C, Forth has a minimal comment tradition (screen topic and stack
>effects). Give your boss "Thinking Forth" to read; and he'll know, how a
>good commented Forth program should look like.
   I don't have a boss. I keep saying things like "You should do this
project in Forth." I'm not sure that "Thinking Forth" is the right thing
to show somebody who doesn't write Forth programs. It would be better
to show a working program that followed some of the ideas in "Thinking
Forth." Forth programmers tell me that they have well written and 
commented code but it is propriatory. Or they show me code that is 
"self commenting" and then proceed to explain it to me with great effort
when I don't understand it.
   So let me ask this. There are over 2000 files in the GEnie and asterix
ftp database. Which file of Forth code will change the mind of somebody
who thinks Forth can't be good since it is a write only language?
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
From: erwin@cs.kun.nl (Erwin Donderdorp)
Subject: Re: Floating Point
Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 19:13:47 GMT

In <memo.686216@cix.compulink.co.uk> spelk@cix.compulink.co.uk (MPE Ltd) writes:
>In a similar vein, writing a tool such as an interface to the standard
>operating system object file format removes the need to write a great
>deal of library code. If people in the Forth community wish C
>programmmers to become multilingual, then C programmers have every right
>to expect Forth programmers to be multilingual. And with multilingual
>ability might come multi-culturalism and mutual respect?

I agree!
our Forth implementations all use a operating system server for ALL
operating system and hardware dependent code. This way these Forths are
really binary compatible between e.g. an Atari ST and a Macintosh (bad
example, 68000 dfwForth does not exist). Just recompile the operating
system server with the local C compiler and you have the Forth for your
new system. You then only have to write different Forths for different
microprocessors, not for different systems.

Erwin

------
This is a private messege/opinion, it has nothing to do with Nijmegen
University...
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Floating Point
Date: 9 Oct 92 12:01:48 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U

Category 10,  Topic 8
Message 93        Fri Oct 09, 1992
E.RATHER [Elizabeth]         at 01:33 EDT
 
RE the discussion of multiple stacks... Look, folks, if it ain't broke, don't
fix it.  Well-factored, modular Forth code doesn't do excessive stack
thrashing.  If you have a problem in this area, you have a problem with basic
Forth skills.

In the past, when we've had this discussion, someone has alwahs raised the
problem of 3-vectors, matrices, etc.  Sure, when dealing with these one
sometimes finds the addition of a few new words such as 3SWAP, 3... etc
useful.  No problem:  adding words to solve problems is the name of the game.

But I have trouble believing that adding additional stacks for simple things
like DO...LOOP indices solves more problems than it creates.  After all,
that's the basic test:  does adding a facility simplify or complicate?  Is
adding this facility the simplest way to solve a problem?

People have been proposing add'l stacks for DO...LOOP, etc., since 1976 (e.g.,
Mike Fisher in Kansas).  The reason they haven't caught on isn't that people
are religious or dogmatic about two stacks, but because it has never been
shown that they earn their keep, e.g., save more than they cost in complexity.

And, once again, the desirability of a floating point stack isn't to avoid
dealing with FP numbers on the data stack (that's no problem -- we have a fine
FP package on the VAX w/o a separate stack) but the desire to take advantage
of the hardware FP processors.
-----
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: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Forth vs C
Date: 10 Oct 92 13:22:16 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U

In article <4107.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>,
	 E.RATHER [Elizabeth] writes:
+Federal Express has a group of about 15 programmers in Colorado Springs
+maintaining both Forth and C programs (Forth since 1986).  They have told me
+they find the Forth programs far easier to maintain and to test than the C
+programs, due to the modularity, flexibility and overall simplicity.

Ok.  What'll it take to get them to write an article for Computer Language,
Dr. Dobbs, or even BYTE?

-Doug
---
Preferred:  dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us	Ok:  {pitt,sei}!willett!dwp
From: eaker@ukulele.crd.ge.com (Chuck Eaker)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Who invented RPN ?
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:19:07 GMT
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center

Polish (prefix) notation is occasionally taught in formal
logic courses along with the more common infix notation. Kpq
is equivalent to p AND q; Apq is equivalent to p OR q, and
KpAqr is equivalent to p AND (q OR r).

The invention of Polish notation is universally attributed to
Lukasiewicz. But the question remains: who first thought to
reverse it?

-- 
Chuck Eaker / P.O. Box 8, K-1 3C12 / Schenectady, NY 12301 USA
eaker@crd.ge.com        eaker@crdgw1.UUCP       (518) 387-5964
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Floating Point
Date: 12 Oct 92 11:57:46 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U

Category 10,  Topic 8
Message 96        Sun Oct 11, 1992
B.RODRIGUEZ2 [Brad]          at 14:39 EDT
 
From Christopher Browne:
 > Can you think of some other "problem area" in Forth whose solution
 > could be made easier by the addition of a personalized stack?

Yes.  Pattern matching, a la Snobol, is frequently implemented using a
"history stack".  (Ref: W. M. Waite, _Implementing_Software_for_
 _Non-Numeric_Applications_, Prentice-Hall, 1973.)

In my "patternForth" package I used the parameter stack for this
function....with some contortions.

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: cmr02@SCM.TEES.AC.UK (Peter J Knaggs)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Who invented RPN ?
Date: 16 Oct 92 09:48:47 GMT
Reply-To: FIGI-L%BRUSPVM.BITNET@cmsa.Berkeley.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet

To Maciej and everone who answered my question, and even for thoughs who
are simply interested.

>  I'm Pole and I want to tell that name of RPN inventor is Lukasiewicz,
>  but there are only overcrossed L in his name (L crossed with /).

Most people aggreed on the basic name but I did have a few different
acent's given.  However, to my amasiment I scaned our library database and
it came up with two books by J. Lukasiewicz:

	a)	Diplomat in Paris 1936--1939.
	b)	Elements of Mathematical Logic.

I decided that if it was anywhare RPN would probably be in (b) so I
currently have our copy out on lone.  It was last loned out January of
1976, according to the stamp.

To give the book it's full reference it is:

Jan Lukasiewicz, "Elements of Mathematical Logic", Volume 31 in the
"International Series of Monographs in Pure and Applied Mathematics",
Pergamon Press Inc., 44--01 21st Street, Long Island City, New York 11101,
1963.

This book was translated into English from it's original Polish by Olgierd
Wojtasiewicz.  The title page of the original was as follows (in english):

	Publications of the Association of Students of Mathematics
		     and Physics in Warsow University.

				Vol. XVIII

		      Elements of Mathematical Logic

				    by

			    Dr Jan Lukasiewicz,
		      Professor at Warsaw University.

	    Authorized lecture notes prepared by M. Presburger.
	   Partly subsidized by the Senate of Warsaw University.

		Financed by the Publishing Committee of the
 Association of Students of Mathematics and Physics in Warsaw University,

				   1929.

In this book Lukasiewicz introduces the "Sentential Calculus".  I suspect
that this is not the first publication regarding the calculus, however, it
is one of very few english translations.  The Sentential Calculus is a
pre-fix notation, and is a full calculus.  In RPN we have a post-fix
notation where we write the "functors" at the end of the function,
otherwise the notation (and thus calculus) is the same.

--
Peter J. Knaggs.       School of Computing and Maths, University of Teesside,
pjk @ scm.tees.ac.uk   Middlesbrough, Cleveland, England.    +44 (642) 342673
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        C makes you think that C is the world's greatest language.
    Forth makes you think that you're the world's greatest programmer.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ps: Having just completed my PhD Thesis, I am on the lookout for any good
    jobs.  Please contact me if you know of any.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: C assembler
From: comjohn@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Mr. John T Jensen)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:38:49 GMT
 <1992Oct9.153438.11711@email.tuwien.ac.at> <1992Oct13.191523.1923@crd.ge.com>
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

eaker@ukulele.crd.ge.com (Chuck Eaker) writes:

>In article <1992Oct9.153438.11711@email.tuwien.ac.at>, anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Martin Ertl) writes:
>|> In article <H.f5CtajwYbto@harvee.billerica.ma.us>, esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us (Eric S Johansson) writes:
>|> |> You can bypass the access and maintenance issues by using the time 
>|> |> honored techinque of generating C as your high-level assembler code.
>|> |> Or if you are feeling more hyper, you could rip open GCC and feed RTL 
>|> |> into the code generator.
>|> 
>|> Right, but the system would not be interactive.

>Not necessarily. I recently looked at Mikael R.K.  Patel's
>TILE Forth (to see how it handled OO extensions) which is
>implemented in C. While browsing through the code I started
>to wonder about writing CODE definitions in C. When the
>smoke cleared I had added an ASSEMBLER vocabulary which
>allowed me to add primitives interactively in two ways:

	*** body of post deleted ***

>...The possibilities for expanding
>Forth's C horizons are rather interesting.

I have posted directly to Chuck expressing interest in his assembler, and
also in a compiler that goes via C (for hardware independence), both to
compile executables, and one to compile a high-level word to a primitive.
Is anyone else interested in this subject?  Has anyone done any work on it?
I am using TILE for OO explorations.

jj

John Thayer Jensen                      64 9 373 7599 ext. 7543
Commerce Computer Services              64 9 373 7437 (FAX)
Auckland University                     jt.jensen@aukuni.ac.nz
Private Bag 92019
AUCKLAND
New Zealand
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth