00:00:00 --- log: started forth/06.08.29 00:05:59 --- join: segher__ (n=segher@dslb-084-056-151-023.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #forth 00:12:41 --- quit: JasonWoof ("off to bed") 00:16:08 --- quit: segher_ (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 01:31:43 --- join: aggieben_ (n=bc@63.98.86.62) joined #forth 01:33:46 --- quit: aggieben (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)) 02:12:18 --- join: sans (n=sans@ACD8D4EF.ipt.aol.com) joined #forth 02:15:10 --- quit: sans (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 02:31:28 --- nick: segher__ -> segher 03:10:13 --- join: virl (n=virl@chello062178085149.1.12.vie.surfer.at) joined #forth 03:21:37 virl 03:21:40 gm 03:24:08 hi Quiznos 03:24:44 hmm.. Quiznos do you know that you are too lame to read the bitchX documentation? 03:26:34 noooo, really?! heh 03:26:45 i thought i changed that 03:26:52 hmm ok 03:31:07 yeah, bitchX is a bitch ;-) 03:32:18 nah 03:44:03 --- join: segher_ (n=segher@dslb-084-056-159-075.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #forth 03:52:12 --- quit: segher (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 04:15:31 --- join: PoppaVic (n=pete@0-1pool47-195.nas30.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 04:21:58 ./invite *.* > #trs80 04:22:10 howdy ;-) 04:22:16 gm 04:23:21 i signed up to be a Fidonet node a few minutes ago 04:23:25 i dont know why 04:23:27 heh 04:24:15 hmm, Fido used to have a nice client-interface program. 04:24:37 ...Opus, it was called 04:24:51 k 04:25:38 Personally, I have about concluded that Useless and BBS's are just about dead and dust. 04:25:56 "uselessnet" 04:26:20 nah 04:26:22 not yet 04:26:42 the same may be changed to protect the instigators, but the concepts persist 04:26:47 s/same/name 04:27:00 s'ok 06:16:05 --- join: Ray_work (n=Raystm2@199.227.227.26) joined #forth 06:17:59 hmmm 06:18:06 You still alive, Quiznos ? 06:19:11 brb 06:19:13 --- quit: PoppaVic ("Pulls the pin...") 06:22:24 --- join: PoppaVic (n=pete@0-1pool67-53.nas22.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 06:23:40 Quiznos: any life yet? 06:58:26 --- join: mark4 (n=mark4@63.163.143.187) joined #forth 06:58:33 --- nick: mark4 -> I440r 07:10:28 --- quit: segher_ (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 07:13:23 --- join: segher_ (n=segher@dslb-084-056-128-224.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #forth 07:29:29 --- quit: I440r ("Leaving") 07:40:43 PoppaVic what kind of life? 07:41:01 --- quit: cods (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 07:41:07 ahh, debating in ##C now - see what snoozing does to you? 07:41:11 ;-) 07:41:35 gotta nap, cant be non-func()al all day 07:42:18 yeah, I need a nap a bit later. 07:44:43 ahh, I got them so flustered they ran off to other debates/questions ;-) 07:44:57 heh 07:45:42 We were sorta' debating what C06 should do/add - and it raised at least 3 issues, but no one has a clear answer... Like talking forths and ANS ;-) 07:46:19 that's beyond my sphere of unnerstanin 07:46:40 ANYWAY, I was going to ask you if you had done or are-considering "event driven programming"? 07:47:25 havent done any; should consider considering it 07:48:18 yes, I've been glaring at libevent and liboop today.... Seems to me like 99% of everything - to include events you'd "raise" like signals. 07:48:47 and async call-backs iinm 07:49:22 No, the idea is that an event is an event - handle it and you might even add new events to call. 07:49:32 oh 07:49:48 That sure sounds like a whole lot of code 07:50:21 i wouldnt know 07:50:28 they even talk about "priorities" - and I try to not dick them. 07:51:32 but, if you can consider even "need more text from FOO" as "event", it ends up being quite interesting. 07:53:38 please look into libevent and liboop.. I think we are even looking at "events" when we change interpreters and parsers/lexers 08:05:04 Quiznos: unless state-changes and char-reads and results and such are not events? I dunno', it just occurs to me that we may be missing something - namely "events". 08:07:07 well, afaik, events correspond most directly to interrupt-driven events; so, char-reads are kbd-ready, and programmable intr control notices from the chip on the mobo 08:07:54 then there's the whole windows event loop which i always got the sense of being a make-work kind of answer to making gui's 08:08:14 not really, but think it over.. Please. I _think_ what I am seeing is that we run too much like idiots 08:08:23 ahh 08:08:36 ok, both libs replace that. 08:09:18 I'm trying to think of - not a filter-translator, but an INTERACTIVE shell. 08:09:25 libs? you wrote something actually? 08:09:26 i'm being reminded of the IPO processing module that Mossebboch (sp?), i think he labelled that style MVC 08:09:46 he wrote a book about Oberon2 08:09:49 IPO? 08:09:58 input/process/output 08:10:05 ahhh 08:10:15 that's xlating 08:10:25 i cant remember the name he used on the modeling in his book 08:10:52 and, 90% of everything is xlating inputs to produce responses. Humans, world, code, gui 08:11:30 Most issues are "when should I do " 08:12:08 seems to me that you're tryin to think of higher-level structures, words and events 08:12:27 the rest is "I'm doing - what's my input?" 08:12:29 why not finish your core engine and being implementing them instead of the mental-exercise 08:12:37 being/begin 08:12:41 that's part of the issue 08:12:58 I disagree with a lot of the core/base/engine stuff. 08:12:58 well at some point, you have to decide, i need the core; finish the core now. 08:13:09 assuredly 08:13:24 then you can postulate AND implement coincidently 08:14:15 Please note: most C'ers disagree with me, but I still see C as a "meta-assembler" with piss-poor size/order/reporting. 08:14:17 make the core work, regardless of how; since you've already modulated the source code, you can replace one implementation with another practically willy-nilly and try again 08:14:41 sure; i know c is and has always been the assembler out there 08:15:00 but as a HLL, i can also recognise your difficulty too 08:15:21 been then best... 08:15:27 no, I see what yer saying - And, I wanted to obviate even codifying 8/16/32/64-bit offsets/ptrs/values. I'm getting there, but it's slow as hell 08:15:28 asm with structs and symtabs 08:15:41 you cant do that in c 08:15:48 yeah 08:15:56 c is still fundamentally a asm language 08:16:03 it respects and intimately knows sizes 08:16:12 use pascal 08:16:14 heh 08:16:14 symtabs are structs that are codified an interp ;-) 08:16:20 yes 08:16:39 Quiznos: recall too: C doesn't REPORT those sizes and orders well. 08:16:59 Forths might, but usually do NOT 08:17:03 then get small-c heh and fix the compiler's sizeof code 08:17:04 heh 08:17:25 ..and Lisp, well: those buggers bypass everthing to compile their own code. 08:18:08 mayhaps you need to choose another implementation language 08:18:21 There are none, to be honest. 08:18:33 but there are `better than C' 08:18:45 Not that handle FFI well, anyway 08:19:05 then head the other direction and start with eforthl 08:19:30 there is no real lateral move from c 08:19:48 down is asm; diagonal is pascal; up is newer HLL's 08:21:07 I think yer right, in a fashion 08:21:07 see, what i dont get it why you dont just implement the core mechanisms of what you need to transform the mental exercises into a concrete platform upon which to implement ideas 08:21:09 --- join: cods (n=cods@tuxee.net) joined #forth 08:21:22 Yeah. 08:21:38 you need core-forth plus libdl and everything else sits on top of that 08:21:51 (using c as your IMP-lang_ 08:21:55 lang) 08:21:57 I've done top-down and even bottom-up, and it still all meets in engines that can interpret something. 08:22:16 Yeah... I need to posit and consider this shit a few days. 08:22:24 you do too much of that. 08:22:38 start with the basics and make a binary already. 08:22:51 well, it means a rewrite - question is "how much do I replace and rewrite?" 08:23:02 a rewrite of what? 08:23:19 everything is in source modules, of your code, right? 08:23:20 all the existing code and headers and sources and tests 08:23:43 yes, and I am likely delving too deep per "unit" 08:24:03 you should have already written the core words and the inner interpreter and code to do the libdl loading and such 08:24:19 that's all you need in C to make a basic engine 08:24:32 and an unexec() 08:24:38 for saving incremental work 08:24:45 It seems to boil down to these basics: 1) whome can do what; 2) what does "what" - right down to the compiled asm. 08:24:55 nope 08:25:02 oh and btw, i suggest that you make unexec produce and save to versioned filename of thekernel 08:25:04 the kernel 08:25:22 I dislike ANS and most forths want to pretend they are the OS and kernel, so this takes some planning. 08:25:22 those 1) and 2)'s are higher level than the kernel 08:25:32 they sure are 08:25:52 you're missing the forest for the Amazon 08:26:57 ok, don't nudge - I need a rewrite. And, frankly - anyone that writes "asm" scares me anyway.. Bad Enough I have to trust in posix at several points ;-) 08:27:23 one more pseudo 08:27:25 this is funi 08:27:30 hmm? 08:27:34 "even FPC wasnt built in a day" LOL 08:27:42 I agree 08:27:48 ok, i'm done. 08:27:49 heh 08:27:59 I sometimes miss the days of FIG forth. 08:28:22 it seems to me that your "over-view" of your activity is too Macro. 08:28:27 at the time, we had ONE ASSEMBLER (per platform) 08:28:36 you need to better balance the macro view with the micro. 08:28:51 kinda like, normal vision, unenhanced. 08:28:56 see what i'm sayin? 08:29:16 yeah... I may need to write tools to build [tools to build tools...] 08:29:20 yea on the assmebler 08:29:47 that's called meta-programming, and is not really the "magic" that everyone makes it out to be, but i love the associated concepts 08:29:50 fuck the asm - I would deal with posix (if not c99) 08:30:14 I don't CARE how we reach the asm.. I care that it is consistent. 08:30:54 but asm isnt sposed to be consistent across cpu's 08:30:59 We can't even trust the CLI for the asm, loader, linker or compiler. 08:31:25 only the higher level languages that we layer on top of the hardware is sposed to be "consistent" 08:31:27 asm is cpu's, yes - and they STILL dick the OS - so do compilers. 08:32:23 the asm is supposed to satisfy the loaders and their sources/objects their linkers: for the OS. 08:32:49 no 08:32:58 no that's not the porpose of asm coding. 08:33:01 so, sure - if someone writes a module in ASM, they have to "play well with others" - same with direct or ASM-generating "compilers" 08:33:18 1 porpose is to get sw running on the "new" platform; 08:33:34 2nd porpose is to make a subr faster; and 08:33:58 Quiznos: dude, I was around when folks flipped toggles to "program" and then fed the system "asm" and then watched all the variants - it's NOT pretty. 08:34:00 3rd is to get information from and to ports to running processes on the hw 08:34:09 yea i know 08:34:21 well, folks want to SKIP steps 08:34:39 but those three arent steps; they are porposes. 08:34:44 ...in fact, a lot of folks think their "language" is THE LANGUAGE 08:35:16 but it is; it is a mental concept/interface to programming all facets of a computer 08:35:24 from UI to the hw 08:35:30 or, that we all use the same CPU or the same OS, or... 08:35:40 the language is the embodiment of the coder's thought 08:35:40 yessir 08:35:43 it is 08:36:15 even the user its self is programmable 08:36:29 Tao of Unix calls is the ``captive interface'' 08:36:31 My "bottom line" is that you want gcc around... Now, even THAT is a mess, but I can live with it until the CLI grows up 08:36:46 so or so looking for the variants is needed. 08:36:51 check out Fabrice Bellard's tcc 08:37:00 small and fast ansi c compiler 08:37:10 suitable for floppy based distros 08:37:12 virl: yeah, that's part of "the build" or the CLI. 08:37:15 and scriptable too 08:38:03 huh? whatever... I need todo something useful 08:38:10 Quiznos: and, then I ask: why are we bowing to silliness and using tools elsewhere that are still dated, or verbose? 08:38:41 virl: you keep banging away, dude - good luck! ;-) 08:38:41 bc you keep "dicking" with mental processing instead of making a binary :) 08:38:43 heh 08:39:13 maybe you should send this thread to ~rms and ~esr and ask them 08:39:22 Quiznos: there is no "binary" unless yer talking cross-compiling and all the autoshit hell 08:39:53 then uninstall auto* and move on and be done with is; stop talking about what doesnt work and implement what DOES work 08:39:58 and, that "cross-compiling" is STILL cpu, not kernel or OS or whatever. 08:40:08 hehehehaha 08:40:17 or DOES> 08:40:20 heh 08:40:31 Quiznos: yeppers - and that would work for one guy and time ;-) 08:40:33 --- join: JasonWoof (n=jason@c-71-192-33-206.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) joined #forth 08:40:33 --- mode: ChanServ set +o JasonWoof 08:40:36 :) 08:41:04 Quiznos: yeah, I hear that a lot - and folks still rely on preinstalled and autoshit ;-) 08:41:30 i've only been in this thread with you an few weeks and already i think your ... ${What_I_wrote_above} 08:41:31 heh 08:42:17 Quiznos: I've felt the same of you, but I'm too tolerant to get upset - wtf do I know? Maybe yers is "The Solution" ;-) 08:42:48 well, what i havent said of mine forth is whati want to do with it. 08:42:57 i have a specific target that i'm moving towards 08:43:11 Everyone was hot for "C--" - it never built for me - package or autoshit? ;-) 08:43:14 not to replace the target but to attempt to reimplement and add some mising idears 08:43:51 yeah, it's all "new ideas" - I'm STILL an Old-Fart and tolerant ;-) 08:44:12 my primary lament is the complete lack of real re-usable information caching to, from, by, and for later recall by the user. 08:44:21 anyway, I need to call it a Knight and deal with home/Mom issues. 08:44:31 caching is NOT trivial 08:44:35 laters. 08:44:39 i cant see why there is so much data losage with multi-giga and terra-bytes of information 08:44:39 --- quit: PoppaVic ("Pulls the pin...") 08:44:59 caching of the data that the user sees is trivial 08:45:11 i'm not talking os-level buffering/caching 08:49:16 --- nick: segher_ -> segher 09:02:16 caching .. puh .. that stuff what all the package managers do, which is btw. a big bunch of data. 09:02:35 in reality nobody sees really the whole problem 09:29:34 yea; mayhaps "cache" is the wrong word i need. 09:29:40 try "recall" 09:29:51 for user's use. 09:36:48 what are you searching for? like smalltalk? 09:37:00 no 09:37:45 i lose too much good data that can be reused if it were cached while i'm using the shell 09:37:52 data or information output 09:38:02 too many ``captive interfaces'' 09:38:14 nothing is integrated 09:38:20 not enuf is integrated 09:38:37 too many disaparate sources that cant be combined 09:38:55 little to no recall. 09:40:18 the why is simple because there are no interfaces betwen sources. 09:40:41 right 09:40:42 and when it would be everytime a patchwork 09:40:56 i'm planning to solve that bottleneck 09:41:00 or sieve 09:42:23 well, I try to solve that a bit too 09:42:35 ok 09:48:24 there are plenty of systems that integrate functionality from what is normally several applications 09:48:31 IDEs and so on 09:48:37 but I never seem to like them 09:48:52 well, except the one I wrote myself 09:49:42 not so much a IDE but more simply a buffer 09:49:52 IDE is just an example 09:50:01 fairly common one 09:50:10 k 09:50:37 I'm assuming people have written things that are a terminal-emulator/shell/etc 09:50:38 all in one 09:51:08 but I can't think of one 09:51:30 nor can i 09:52:33 I think generally what happends with those combos is that the benifits of integration don't make up for the loss in flexibility 09:52:47 ie if I use the combo then I don't get to choose my favorite terminal-emulator anymore 09:53:11 --- nick: Raystm2 -> nanstm 09:53:40 hence, Forth. 09:53:47 a big integrated thing has the potential to be the best, but it's gotta be just right 09:54:37 i'm been actively contemplating this for a few months now, and it's beginning to make sense in how and what should be provided 09:54:47 remember, it's Forth. 09:54:53 there needs to be a great deal of knowledge of and focus on good interface design 09:55:06 from looking around... most programmers don't know thing 1 about this 09:55:29 bout what? 09:55:52 yea, but in forth the user becomes adept 09:56:08 I, the coder, just have to code the proper primitives 09:56:35 about good interface design 09:56:54 ok 09:57:06 read The Humane Interface 09:57:31 sans `e' 09:57:51 you don't need to follow the example/suggestion they have in the book, but it summarizes and explains a huge body of research in how people work with computers 09:57:57 or is it the ``User Interface'' 09:57:59 no, I spelled it right 09:58:06 the book writ by the guy from Apple? 09:58:18 ok 09:58:28 Jef Raskin 09:58:35 ok 09:58:39 he was one of the old apple guys 09:58:44 nods 09:58:47 I wouldn't say "the" guy though. that would be jobs 09:59:21 yea, one of the principal designers of... 09:59:26 @apple 09:59:53 he played a big part in the design of the original "mac"s. though he considered it a big mistake that that general design is still used today now that the usage of computers has changed so drastically 10:00:14 yep 10:00:39 he designed an interface for rich people to use for 5 minutes at a time. 10:00:54 maybe a few hours a week at most 10:01:41 and we're still using that model even though the average hours/week is probably more like 40 10:02:05 we need interfaces for people that really work on computers. not just use them for a short while every once in a while 10:02:54 for me, this leads to what Backus said about langauges in his acceptance speech in the 70s; the one where he introduced FP 10:03:09 higher level languages 10:03:35 fp? 10:03:56 functional progrmming 10:04:21 but that fp was too terse and not for real interactive use 10:05:15 and from what I've seen of the other fp languages, for me, they still arent right; they've bcome too complicated that 4+ years of Univ. study are required to use them 10:07:44 forth is close to what backus was encouraging in language development but forth needs to be enhanced to actually do what he was talking about 10:10:29 yeah 10:10:38 forth inc says that they have no trouble training people 10:10:45 they hire proffessional programmers that don't know forth 10:11:01 learning to think in Forth tho is not taught quickly 10:11:04 that takes time 10:11:09 as with any p.l 10:11:57 that's one of my main difficulties with so called higher level languages, c#, java, c++, the fp styled languages, etc 10:12:06 i can think forthy 10:12:21 in forth. it's native to me now after so many years of lookin and peekin at it. 10:12:43 for forth to move towards and be an fp capable language, IMO, 10:13:14 we need to incorporate ("steal") the Good Idears (TM) from other languages; especially Lisp and that language family. 10:13:23 we need forth-style lists. 10:13:29 forth inc has a particular forth, and libs and standards and practices 10:13:33 that's one thing i'm stuck on 10:13:43 they (jeff) say that they have no trouble with new employees that don't know forth 10:13:49 one day to train them in their practices/language 10:13:50 yea, they do and that's fine, but i want to move onward and upward 10:13:55 and after a week they have good productivity 10:14:00 ok 10:14:20 which Jeff? 10:14:25 ultratechnology.com 10:14:28 fox 10:14:28 skip 10:14:32 oh right 10:14:33 ok 10:14:56 i really need to refresh on Brodie's books. 10:15:04 i learned think in forth from HIm 10:15:04 I'm just saying that done right, forth should not impose a difficult language barrier 10:15:09 and that we have an example of this 10:15:11 exactly 10:15:14 ok 10:15:25 forth is a no limits environment 10:15:25 not sure you know about the example part :) 10:15:33 for me, it's the same with God 10:15:34 no limits 10:15:43 dont know "example part" 10:16:14 the "no limits" thing is one reason why i dont get why Vic is stalling. 10:16:17 it doesnt make sense to me 10:16:32 did you read that thread today tween me and him? 10:16:52 he's got so many walls of limitations going up he's stymied 10:17:30 (btw, if i'm typing too fast (i do trip flood bots lol) tell me to halt) 10:20:46 I've hat PoppaVic on ignore for a long time 10:21:15 too bad. you might have been able to be an encouraging counselor to him 10:22:25 more recently I got/hacked a plugin so it changes everything he says to a string of equal length that just contains "blah blah blah" 10:22:33 lol 10:22:39 that's cruel l;OLOL 10:22:45 I've tried counceling him. 10:22:46 believe me 10:22:53 it works great 10:22:58 I grin instead of grinding my teeth 10:23:00 but counseling is not a single-shot event 10:23:03 ok 10:23:05 lol 10:23:09 damn that's funi 10:23:11 PoppaVic doesn't seem to understand anything intelligent that anybody says 10:23:11 rofl 10:23:17 and nobody can understand what he's saying 10:23:21 that's the confusion 10:23:28 and if they do understand at all they think it's stupid 10:23:41 well, then one must know how to lead him to providing the deep info he's pondering 10:23:48 that's called "communication" 10:23:51 :) 10:24:15 I can't understand him 10:24:17 ok 10:24:23 and I just get frustrated trying to talk anyway 10:24:23 that's really funi 10:24:32 then you also are trying to hard 10:24:33 my time is better spent elsewhere 10:24:43 ok 10:24:53 birnt bridges and all that 10:24:55 yea, i get it 10:26:11 I would totally talk to him if I thought I could help 10:26:21 but I've put many hours in, and still don't understand him 10:26:25 and I think he still doesn't understand me 10:26:38 that bytes 10:27:03 now I wish he'd go away and stop wasting our time with his meaningless buzzword chatter 10:27:12 no, that's wrong. 10:27:21 he needs to be "talked down" 10:27:27 as in from a precipice 10:27:38 dont avoid him 10:27:39 I have no problem ignoring him and this whole channel when he's talking, but it bothers me that he drags this channel down to that level 10:27:50 you know better than I hs personal difficulties 10:27:57 hs/his 10:28:11 because new intelligent people sometimes show up durring, and get an idea of what this channel is like from those conversations 10:28:20 dont generalise 10:28:24 that doesnt apply to me 10:28:37 what generalization? 10:28:38 not even Quartus will reprogram me. 10:28:41 I'm talking about PoppaVic here 10:29:04 yea i know but your thing with Vic is similar to what Quartus has iwth me 10:29:12 he wants me to self-censor and i refuse 10:29:24 i am not a compartmentalised thinker 10:29:38 ok 10:29:40 lilo wanted me to be compartmentalised too 10:29:47 i refuse. 10:30:00 What you will do is keep your religion out of the channel, Quiznos. That's a freenode thing, not specific to me, and it's good policy for keeping civil discourse. 10:30:17 a valid opinion 10:30:24 one which I don't expect people to follow 10:30:24 and that's what it is, opinion 10:30:36 yep 10:31:36 I agree that there are some topics that are better avoided in most circumstances. politics is the big one, religion falls into that catagory 10:31:54 but they come up sometimes... 10:32:21 There are appropriate venues for such discussion and proselytization, and this isn't one of them. 10:35:12 oh please, people want to talk about everything and some people want to know how God is related to everything. that Quartus and others get violent and vociferous when the mere inference to God is made is conclusive evidence of their relationship and lack there of. 10:35:45 what Quartus is talking about is the compartmentalising that I cannot do. 10:36:17 Quiznos: lost you most of the way through that 10:36:19 This also isn't an appropriate forum for you to express your opinions of my relationships or religious beliefs. It's just not an appropriate topic here; please stop. 10:36:29 right about conclusize 10:37:40 Quiznos: I really don't understand that last sentence 10:38:23 JasonWoof ok... Quartus wants me to self-censor, as i mentioned a moment ago 10:38:45 just as lilo did 10:39:12 I'm curious about what you're saying about relationship and what that has to do with god-talk 10:40:08 ooh! food. bbiab 10:40:33 -_- 10:40:56 not letting other people live 10:47:19 --- quit: cods (Remote closed the connection) 10:49:29 --- join: cods (n=cods@tuxee.net) joined #forth 10:51:13