HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: ANS FORTH TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
Date: 17 Apr 92 12:05:51 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.

Category 10,  Topic 2
Message 154       Thu Apr 16, 1992
E.RATHER [Elizabeth]         at 21:28 EDT
 
The responses to commentors will be mailed either over this coming weekend
(4/18-19) or Mon.  They consist of a 1.5" thick bound book containing all
comments and all responses, plus a 150pp document showing all changes to the
dpANS (before/after text).  I will try to ensure that foreign ones go air
mail.  Enjoy!
-----
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: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: ANS FORTH TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
Date: 11 Apr 92 16:01:29 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.


 Scanning Forth (58) Conference 

 Date: 03-29-92 (23:12)              Number: 30904 of 30906 (Echo)
   To: B.DUNN5 [BRIAN]               Refer#: 30891
 From: STEVE WHEELER                   Read: NO
 Subj: ANS FORTH GLOSSARY            Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
 Conf: FORTH (58)                 Read Type: GENERAL (+)

 -> Jack Woehr has uploaded a proto-ANS Forth package for the Amiga.
 -> Included in that package is a file which is a glossary of ANS-Forth
 -> words.  Would someone who knows ANS-Forth be able to take that
 -> glossary, update it, add what's missing, add examples of use for any
 -> word which wouldn't be familiar to Forth- 83 users, and add high
 -> level definintions for a few words such as POSTPONE?

 I sincerely doubt it would be useful enough. I have helped JAX with his
 Forth (mainly some math algorithms), and have spent more hours than I
 can remember in the last four months implementing an Forth which tracks
 the dpANS. Just last week, I had to do a total rewrite of the error
 handling routines, because I noted something in the discussions and
 rationales with which I was not compliant. Let me rephrase what others
 have already said, in words of three syllables or less:

         STACK DIAGRAMS ARE NOT ENOUGH!

 - wheels

 NET/Mail : RCFB Golden, CO (303) 278-0364 VESTA & Denver FIG for Forth!
 <<<>>>

-----
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: koopman+@cs.cmu.edu (Philip Koopman)
Subject: How to make money from PD Forth
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 92 22:12:42 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Summary: Give away software, sell books


Glen Haydon made a bit of money from MVP Forth (which
was public domain).  Most of the money was from selling
copies of "All About Forth", which was the reference
manual/glossary.  Free software -- sell the books.
(Isn't this how Ting makes some money too?)

BTW, there is an excellent reason for FIG to have a reasonable
Forth to distribute free.  If FIG decides to get into the
business of *teaching Forth*, then it will need an academic-
quality Forth that matches its teaching materials precisely
and can be distributed freely.  Other than publishing Forth
Dimensions it's not clear to me what business FIG is really
in now (can someone help me out on this?).


  Phil Koopman                              koopman@utrcgw.utc.com
  United Technologies Research Center       (203) 727-1624
  411 Silver Lane     East Hartford, CT  06108
These opinions are my own.
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: for us beginners?  Help
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:47:12 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.

Category 2,  Topic 5
Message 81        Mon Apr 06, 1992
D.RUFFER [Dennis]            at 00:04 EDT
 
Re: jacobsen@itexjct.jct.ac.il (Joel Jacobsen)

 > : within ( n low_limit high_limit --- flag )
 >   dup rot >= rot > and ;
 >
 > but is doesnt work. WHY?

The >= is consuming your arguement so the > doesn't have anything to work
with.  You need to find a way to save it (hint: try the return stack) so that
it can be used in both tests.  Try that before we give you the answer since it
is important to learn the stack gymnastics required in Forth.

   {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
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: What should the Standard include?
Date: 12 Apr 92 13:13:26 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.

Category 10,  Topic 30
Message 174       Wed Apr 08, 1992
D.RUFFER [Dennis]            at 01:59 EDT
 
I'm not really sure how FIG could play into making standard wordsets Brian. 
Past history has shown me that it is difficult to get any group of Forth
programmers to agree on much of anything.  Take for example the file word set
that is still being hotly debated in the ANS committee.  Mitch Bradley has
been touting a file standard for many years and much of his efforts have
fallen on deaf ears.  Now, we have something in the proposed standard, and
even it is being debated now that people are finally taking it seriously.

Most people have to be interested in what you are trying to standardize before
they will even contribute to the discussion.  FIG backing isn't going to buy
much if there isn't general interest on the topic anyway.  An independent
group of people can get together and agree that something is worth proposing,
then FIG could help them spread the word to other users, but I'm not sure I
see much of any other role it could play.

What do you have in mind?   {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
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Forth in print
Date: 12 Apr 92 13:13:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: willett.3275.UUL1.3#5129
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.


 Date: 04-06-92 (22:12)              Number: 30993 of 31006 (Echo)
   To: B.RODRIGUEZ2 [BRAD]           Refer#: 30911
 From: RJ BROWN                        Read: NO
 Subj: FORTH IN PRINT                Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
 Conf: FORTH (58)                 Read Type: GENERAL (+)

 Is this computer journal you speak of the IEEE Computer Journal?

 NET/Mail : LMI Forth Board, Los Angeles, CA (310) 306-3530
 <<<>>>
-----
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: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: ANS TC Magnet for Interpreter
Date: 11 Apr 92 16:01:38 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.


 Date: 03-24-92 (00:18)              Number: 30937 of 30954 (Echo)
   To: ALL                           Refer#: NONE
 From: MARCEL HENDRIX                  Read: (N/A)
 Subj: LOCALS                        Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
 Conf: FORTH (58)                 Read Type: GENERAL (+)

 A co-worker of mine insists that I should modify the LOCAL
 concept of our soon-to-be-released Transputer Forth in order
 that it accepts the following construct:

 |I found the following 'bug':
 |
 |: LOCAL-CLONE   BL WORD COUNT (LOCAL) ; IMMEDIATE
 |
 |works, but the following does NOT work:
 |
 |: LOCAL-CLONE2
 |     0 LOCAL doesnotmatter
 |     BL WORD COUNT (LOCAL) ; IMMEDIATE

 Unless somebody thinks it is interesting, I won't discuss how
 our LOCAL's are implemented and WHY this doesn't work.
 The question is, would somebody who has read dpANS-2 expect the
 above to work?  Any ANSI expert care to comment?

 >M.

 PS: We don't need END-LOCALS in our implementation. I guess
 adding it to LOCAL-CLONE2 makes the problem even worse.

 NET/Mail : FS FORTH Systeme BBS West Germany ++49 7667 556
 <<<>>>

-----
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: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Feedback to the Forth Interest Group
Date: 8 Apr 92 12:33:34 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.

Category 1,  Topic 2
Message 152       Fri Mar 27, 1992
B.DUNN5 [Brian]              at 05:02 EST
 
Pardon the above speech.  I was on a roll, and had a point to make. Still do,
in fact.

As for the graphics, I didn't know anyone was already working on standardizing
windows and graphics.  Is this the ANS group?  What else are they working on?

I hope to have concrete examples fairly soon.  I have Forths for ST and Mac,
and did work with C and XWindows.  Finding a common functionality between them
does appear to be very possible.

Fortran and C programmers who I have talked to about a universal Forth GUI
standard think it would be remarkably useful.  Perhaps in a few months we can
show them something to be impressed by.

Some of the other things I mentioned in a previous message such as structures,
Nd arrays, and function key names are all worth standardizing.  Could these
become part of the ANS standard?

( Come to think of it, I believe that Xwindows has standard names for special
keys...  Forth might as well too. )
-----
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
Subject: Willett back on-line.
From: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips)
Date: 6 Apr 92 11:42:49 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.

willett.pgh.pa.us is back on-line.  ForthNet posts and FNEAS service
will resume in a day or two.

-Doug
---
Preferred:  dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us	Ok:  {pitt,sei}!willett!dwp
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Feedback to the Forth Interest Group
Date: 8 Apr 92 12:33:23 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.

Category 1,  Topic 2
Message 147       Wed Mar 25, 1992
B.DUNN5 [Brian]              at 04:25 EST
 
Someone should make files which will convert F-PC, F83, eForth, and so on to
ANS-Forth.  Let the masses give it a try.  If a few last changes are made to
ANS Forth, change the files.  Within a week we can be uploading and
downloading programs between different Forths.

-----
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: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Graphics
Date: 12 Apr 92 13:13:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: willett.3267.UUL1.3#5129
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.


 Date: 04-06-92 (21:55)              Number: 30990 of 31006 (Echo)
   To: B.DUNN5 [BRIAN]               Refer#: 30918
 From: RJ BROWN                        Read: NO
 Subj: GRAPHICS, GUIS, AND EVENT     Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
 Conf: FORTH (58)                 Read Type: GENERAL (+)

 If we are going to go running off half cocked and try to re-standardize
 the graphics world, I strongly suggest that we look first at the rapidly
 growing in popularity PHIGS and XPHIGS standards.  These address 3D
 graphisc GUI problems in a windowed (at least the latter) environment.
 Why should we re-invent another wheel?

 NET/Mail : LMI Forth Board, Los Angeles, CA (310) 306-3530
 <<<>>>
-----
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: FRED%JWH@VX.ACS.UMN.EDU (Fred H Olson -- WB0YQM)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Forth using Hams? going to Dayton?
Date: 13 Apr 92 03:45:00 GMT


                                  Sun  04-12-1992
                                  Fred H. Olson  WB0YQM
                                  1221 Russell Av N
                                  Minneapolis, MN 55411
                                  (612) 588-9532
                                  (Internet: fred%jwh@vx.acs.umn.edu)

Are any other Forthers planning to attend the big Dayton Hamfest
April 24 - 26 ?  It might be fun to meet there.  For that matter
are there any hams who wont be at Dayton this year.   Fred

[The other message I posted with a title like this one should have gone
 elsewhere - ignore it... Fred]
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Feedback to the Forth Interest Group
Date: 13 Apr 92 12:08:29 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.


 Date: 04-10-92 (14:00)              Number: 31028 of 31033
   To: STEFAN BAKER                  Refer#: 31007
 From: ANIL RODRIX                     Read: NO
 Subj: FEEDBACK TO THE FORTH INT     Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
 Conf: FORTH (58)                 Read Type: GENERAL (+)

 Since you ask - I dont use many Forths, as I dont know what to do with
 them ( on the PC ). F-PC got dumped when I was having drive problems.
 I could use a PC Forth if I/O to discs, files, serial ports were cleary
 and concisely described - simple screen control would be helpful. I dont
 "need" one enough to requisition a commercial package.
 However I use Max-forth on the NMI 68hc11 boards for 2 machine models
 now, and I am trying to design more machines ( motion control types) for
 our product line using them. I was looking forward to the RTX2001 being
 supplied on a low/reasonable cost board, but thats out now. Could have
 used that into the next century.

 PCRelay:PROPC -> #288 RelayNet (tm)
 4.11             Pittsburgh ProPC BBS (412) 321-6645
 <<<>>>

-----
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: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Feedback to the Forth Interest Group
Date: 13 Apr 92 12:08:25 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.


 Date: 04-08-92 (01:58)              Number: 31010 of 31027
   To: LRWEBBER [LARRY]              Refer#: 30956
 From: STEFAN BAKER                    Read: NO
 Subj: FEEDBACK TO THE FORTH INT     Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
 Conf: FORTH (58)                 Read Type: GENERAL (+)

 L[   Stefen, I am seeing your message.

        Thanks for the reply.  I appreciate it.  |-)

 L[   Concerning s-l-o-w time response on Genie am going to invest some
      time this coming week to Alladin (sp?).

        By the time these messages make the rounds I would expect a
 significant amount of time to elapse.  I know nothing about and do not
 use GEnie, the cost is more than I care to spend.  I do, however, use
 America OnLine which is more reasonable, albeit still more than I would
 like to be spending.

        Will someone please tell me why GEnie is the service of choice.
 Perhaps it has to do with access.  Otherwise, I would lean toward the
 lowest cost alternative.  Of course, AoL is relatively new and momentum
 is a powerful force. |-) I'm sure that the Forth conf on GEnie has been
 going for some time.

        Regards,
        Stefan

 ---
    JABBER v1.1   Remember - Life's a batch and then you die, or marry one.

 PCRelay:COMCTRII -> #1310 RelayNet (tm)
 4.11                Command Central II * 317-782-8094
 <<<>>>

-----
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: Feedback to the Forth Interest Group
Date: 8 Apr 92 02:33:09 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.

In article <4172.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us> (a long time ago)
	D.RUFFER [Dennis] writes:
+Re: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips)
+ > +        2) How much business would it take from the vendors?
+ > That should not be a relevant question.  Will FIG support/not-
+ > support some third party package on the basis of whether or not
+ > it would compete with a vendor?  How much of the software-on-disk
+ > that one can order from FIG, right now, today, competes with a
+ > vendor?
+Third party software is not the issue in my statement Doug.  Of course we
+sould and will support whatever people come up with.  The point is what FIG
+does or doesn't do to compete with the vendors.

I don't see the line that you see there.  I guess the question boils down
to "what does it mean for FIG to compete with vendors?".  In my mind, if
FIG is supplying software/manuals for a system (regardless of where FIG
originally got it), and if that material is similar to material available
from a vendor, then FIG is competing with a vendor.

+ > +If we can convince vendors to work with us, we can pool our funds
+ > +together to do some really effective advertising.
+ >
+ > Whoa, hold on a minute Dennis.  I _do_ _not_ want FIG to be an
+ > advertising arm of any Forth vendor, or any group of Forth
+ > vendors.  I _do_ _not_ want even an appearance of such an
+ > association.

+Can you explain to me why this would be bad?  Neither FIG nor the vendors have
+enough capital to be able to do the kind of advertising it takes to reach the
+mass market (i.e. a full page spread in BYTE for example), but if we all work
+together, we might come up with enough money to do _something_.

I agree with Stephen Pelc, in article <1992Mar15.162735.23884@demon.co.uk>
	spelk@cix.compulink.co.uk (MPE Ltd) writes:

+If FIG is to be independent, it must also be seen to be
+independent, and thus should clarify its position within its own
+advertising in Forth Dimensions (or any other publication for
+that matter). Advertising vendors' manuals is perhaps a service,
+but also has its dangers. If FIG is to be seen to be independent,
+then it must be completely detached from ALL vendors, including
+Silicon Composers and Offete Enterprises. Visible detachment
+might also improve the advertising revenues!

[Dennis Ruffer again:]
+What is so bad about the idea of FIG being a Forth advocacy group?

But that isn't the same thing as FIG being an advertising arm for a
vendor or group of vendors.  To state it bluntly:  Is FIG a "Forth"
advocacy group or a "Forth vendors A, B, ... , C" advocacy group?

-Doug
---
Preferred:  dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us	Ok:  {pitt,sei}!willett!dwp
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: ANS FORTH TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
Date: 11 Apr 92 16:01:25 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.

Category 10,  Topic 2
Message 126       Tue Mar 24, 1992
E.RATHER [Elizabeth]         at 22:15 EST
 
Here's a quick report on X3J14's meeting 19, which took place  last week:

The four-month public review period for the Draft Proposed  ANS Forth (dpANS)
closed February 25.  X3J14, the Technical  Committee developing ANS Forth,
received 34 official comments  and three late comments.  Many of the comments
were multi- part, producing over 200 discrete items.  Of the 37 comments, 
only three were negative.  The others were generally  supportive, pointing out
unclear issues, making specific  suggestions and noting typos.

All the public review comments as well as a number of  technical proposals
were considered by X3J14 in its 19th  meeting held March 17-21 at Athena
Programming near Portland,  OR.  Reported typos will be fixed, many of the
suggestions  were adopted (or alternative solutions were found for the 
problems raised), and the document was clarified in many  areas.

As required by X3 procedures, all commentors will receive  responses drafted
and approved by the TC.  The TC agreed to  send each commentor the complete
set of comments and  responses, and a copy of the changes made to the
document.

The TC was pleased at the amount of time and effort invested  in the comments.
Many interesting and valid points were  raised, and the document is much
improved.  The improvements  are incremental in nature, with no radical
changes in policy  or approach (except for the three comments noted above, 
extensive revisions were not requested).  Some words were  dropped from
extension wordsets, and some others added  (particularly in the Floating Point
wordset).  A few words  got more mnemonic names, descriptions and requirements
were  clarified, and more Rationale material was added.

The revised dpANS will be released for a two-month public  review soon,
probably in May.  As before, copies will be  available from Global Engineering
Documents, 2805 McGaw Ave.,  Irvine, CA  92714, 800-854-7179 or 714-261-1455
(outside USA  & Canada).  Comments received during this period will be 
considered in September.  This process will repeat until the  TC determines
that no more substantive changes are needed, at  which time the document will
be forwarded to X3 for  processing as an ANS.
-----
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