00:00:00 --- log: started forth/13.08.01
00:04:26 --- join: epicmonkey (~epicmonke@188.134.41.113) joined #forth
00:15:49 --- quit: Bahman (Quit: Leaving.)
00:18:24 --- join: Bahman (~Bahman@86.98.22.86) joined #forth
00:25:39 --- join: arquebus (~frath@c-107-3-164-239.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) joined #forth
00:47:30 --- part: arquebus left #forth
01:07:07 --- quit: epicmonkey (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
01:24:11 --- join: josvuk (~josef@p54ABE87E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) joined #forth
01:29:59 <josvuk> Hi
01:30:11 <josvuk> How to fix this
01:31:24 <josvuk> : init boot hd:\forth\screendim.of ; unknown word hd.....              :-(
01:35:56 <tangentstorm> josvuk: does "boot hd:\forth\screendim.of" work when you type it by hand?
01:36:54 <tangentstorm> if so, 'boot' is probably calling 'word' or 'gettoken' or whatever the word that reads a string is called in this version of forth.
01:37:28 <josvuk> yes it works with no error and it changes the screen resolution from 1024x768 to 640x480
01:37:41 <tangentstorm> in other words, boot is probably just a frontend to some other word, so use 'see boot' to find out what it does and do the same thing yourself
01:38:15 <tangentstorm> (but instead of reading a string from input, put the string on the stack manually)
01:46:59 --- join: true-grue (~quassel@95-25-69-164.broadband.corbina.ru) joined #forth
01:48:49 --- quit: mark4 (Remote host closed the connection)
02:09:19 --- quit: Bahman (Quit: Leaving.)
02:16:16 --- join: epicmonkey (~epicmonke@host-224-58.dataart.net) joined #forth
02:26:27 --- join: Bahman (~Bahman@86.98.22.86) joined #forth
02:48:03 --- quit: Bahman (Quit: Leaving.)
02:48:14 --- quit: kludge` (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
02:53:54 --- join: kludge` (~comet@unaffiliated/espiral) joined #forth
02:55:58 <yunfan> tangentstorm: i think the problem might caused by the hidden quote
03:07:21 <itsy> I'm off to the Centre for Computing History in Cambridge tomorrow http://ComputingHistory.org.uk :-)
03:08:11 <yunfan> oop, are you the author of itsyforth?
03:08:30 <itsy> Hi yunfan. Yes, that's me :-)
03:09:20 <yunfan> itsy: i found that your kernel is very mini 
03:09:35 <yunfan> the philosophy of it looks like jeforth
03:09:59 <itsy> Oh. I haven't seen jeforth. I'll take a look after work.
03:10:34 <yunfan> www.jeforth.com
03:10:41 <itsy> Thanks :-)
03:10:44 <yunfan> its a javascript project
03:11:02 <yunfan> but i follow that made my own python version :]
03:24:38 --- join: Bahman (~Bahman@86.98.22.86) joined #forth
04:19:39 --- quit: itsy (Quit: itsy)
04:20:06 --- join: nighty^ (~nighty@lns-bzn-49f-62-147-170-46.adsl.proxad.net) joined #forth
04:22:10 --- quit: impomatic (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
04:22:36 --- join: impomatic (~chatzilla@46.208.89.101) joined #forth
04:24:05 --- quit: dys (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
04:26:34 --- join: dys (~user@2a01:1e8:e100:8296:21a:4dff:fe4e:273a) joined #forth
05:19:28 --- part: bogen left #forth
05:37:44 --- quit: josvuk (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
06:53:08 --- quit: Bahman (Quit: Leaving.)
07:32:14 --- join: fantazo (~fantazo@213.129.230.10) joined #forth
07:36:14 --- join: cristoper (~cynic@174-16-64-106.hlrn.qwest.net) joined #forth
07:36:20 --- part: cristoper left #forth
08:32:39 --- join: Kumul (~nmz@adsl-64-237-234-8.prtc.net) joined #forth
08:46:12 --- quit: Eth|cal (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
08:48:03 --- join: itsy (~digital_w@46.208.89.101) joined #forth
08:48:41 --- join: Eth|cal (~sam@ppp59-167-172-238.static.internode.on.net) joined #forth
08:57:00 --- join: ncv (~quassel@79.114.15.47) joined #forth
08:57:00 --- quit: ncv (Changing host)
08:57:00 --- join: ncv (~quassel@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth
09:15:05 --- quit: ncv (Remote host closed the connection)
09:17:23 --- join: ncv (~quassel@79.114.15.47) joined #forth
09:17:23 --- quit: ncv (Changing host)
09:17:23 --- join: ncv (~quassel@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth
09:29:02 --- quit: karswell` (Remote host closed the connection)
10:30:52 --- join: josvuk (~josef@p54ABC215.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) joined #forth
10:32:22 --- quit: Kumul (Quit: Divided by 0)
10:34:44 --- join: Kumul (~nmz@adsl-64-237-234-8.prtc.net) joined #forth
10:36:24 <josvuk> Hi, what's that false invert . gives me ffffffff is it two's complement?
10:38:00 <josvuk> why not false invert . gives simply -1 ?
10:43:35 <josvuk> : ?DAY 32 < IF ." looks good " ELSE ." no way " THEN ; 
10:44:04 <tangentstorm> -1 as an unsigned 32-bit hex number is ffffffff
10:44:13 --- join: _spt_ (~steven@unaffiliated/-spt-/x-5624824) joined #forth
10:44:47 <tangentstorm> probably if you say decimal it'll print -1 instead. no idea.
10:44:58 <josvuk> should test a number from the stack if it is a valid day but if I put -1, 0 on the stack it says looks good but no day has the number -1 or 0
10:45:07 <josvuk> how to fix the code?
10:46:01 <tangentstorm> both of those numbers are less than 32 right? :)
10:46:20 <tangentstorm> so you need to also check that the number is greater than 0
10:48:26 <tangentstorm> make sense? or do you need more help?
10:50:44 <josvuk> ffffffff ?DAY is -1 why but it is also the largest number for 32 bit so why don't it get no way ?
10:52:23 <koisoke> : ?day 1- 31 u< if ." looks good" else ." no way" then ;
10:53:14 <tangentstorm> ah...   u<   must be the unsigned version. interesting.
11:06:22 --- quit: Kumul (Quit: Divided by 0)
11:08:10 --- join: Kumul (~nmz@adsl-64-237-234-8.prtc.net) joined #forth
11:09:45 --- quit: fantazo (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
11:28:41 <tangentstorm> i am doing something javascripty today.
11:30:06 <tangentstorm> in javascript, there is a thing called 'this' that is sort of like the current context that's passed along through various function calls.
11:30:24 <tangentstorm> it behaves oddly. i'm not fully sure i understand it.
11:30:45 <tangentstorm> but...
11:30:57 <tangentstorm> it can be any object you want.
11:31:11 <tangentstorm> like.. it can be an array.
11:31:42 <tangentstorm> only an array in javascript is really more like a double ended queue.. it has push and pop and shift/unshift.
11:32:46 <tangentstorm> so.. you could make 'this' be a js array and then call functions, and now you have a data stack and a return stack that are cleanly separated.
11:33:40 <tangentstorm> so now you can pretty much get rid of your variables in javascript and just call this[0] for tos and this[1] for nos, etc.
11:34:47 <tangentstorm> except.. you still do have variables and arguments and you can use them for some third channel if you want
11:36:09 <tangentstorm> a third stack even, because 'arguments' is an array and you can change it around and even pass your arguments to child functions unchanged.
11:36:37 <tangentstorm> long story short: js could sort of be treated like a really ugly forth with 3 stacks. the end.
11:41:37 <josvuk> hm, don't do anything with java use squeak instead :-)
11:43:23 <tangentstorm> i like squeak, but i'm talking about javaSCRIPT
11:43:58 <tangentstorm> (i'm wrong about being able to push and pop to the arguments. you can pass the arguments object around but it's a fixed size construct.
11:45:45 --- quit: sirdancealot (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
11:47:01 --- quit: epicmonkey (Read error: Operation timed out)
11:47:48 --- join: sirdancealot (~sirdancea@98.82.broadband5.iol.cz) joined #forth
12:18:00 <KipIngram> Um, I thought "this" represented the object used to invoke the currently executing method.
12:18:48 <tangentstorm> nope
12:19:21 <KipIngram> Are you sure?
12:19:35 <KipIngram> Then how do you assign some object to "this"?
12:19:35 <tangentstorm> you can create bound functions that have a fixed 'this'
12:20:04 <KipIngram> Well, that sounds to me like you then invoke those directly, like a traditional function, rather than invoking them as an object's method.
12:20:15 <tangentstorm> whatever.call(thingThatWillBeThis, 'things','that','will','be','arguments')
12:20:45 <KipIngram> So you're saying I can define class A, create method B that is *not* fixed and method C that *is* fixed as member functions of that class.
12:20:50 <tangentstorm> no
12:20:56 <KipIngram> Ok.
12:20:57 <tangentstorm> you can't do that
12:21:04 <tangentstorm> you can't define classes :)
12:21:05 <KipIngram> How do you call a bound function?
12:21:30 <tangentstorm> there's a spec for adding classes to javascript in the future though.
12:21:30 <KipIngram> Ok.  Then what is an object an instance of?
12:22:03 <tangentstorm> you could say that there is one class in javascript: Object
12:22:11 <tangentstorm> but every individual object has a prototype
12:22:49 <tangentstorm> but a prototype is more like an instance itself than a class.
12:23:44 <KipIngram> How do you make different objects behave differently?
12:24:09 <tangentstorm> i'm almost positive you can say   x = new Foo();  and then   x.name='fred';  y = new x; and y.name == 'fred'
12:24:20 * tangentstorm tests
12:24:57 <tangentstorm> you can assign different functions to the same properties ... so   x.dosomething and y.dosomething can be different
12:25:10 <KipIngram> I don't understand - the whole point of an object oriented language is that you can defines objects of different "sorts" that have different functions that make sense to call on them, etc.
12:25:31 <KipIngram> You're implying Javascript isn't really object oriented - not "really" - and if that's the case then my notion of "this" makes no sense.
12:26:01 <KipIngram> And in my mine a "class" is simply the collection of functions that are associated with a particular object type.
12:26:20 <KipIngram> my mind
12:27:24 <KipIngram> I don't knowJavascript so I shouldn't judge, but it sounds almost like they said "we're not going to build a true object oriented language, but we want to call it object oriented because that's cool these days, so let's just put some of the object oriented terminology into play *somehow*".
12:30:16 <tangentstorm> function az(n){this.n = n; var self=this; return function(){return self}}; var a = new az(1), z=new az(2); b = new a();
12:30:48 <tangentstorm> b is now an object and  b.n == 1
12:31:15 <tangentstorm> if you say c = new z(); then c will have n ==2
12:32:53 <tangentstorm> i don't understand why it works that way or think it's good that it works that way, but since that's how it works i'm curious what i can do with it :)
12:33:48 <KipIngram> Ugh.
12:34:05 <KipIngram> So now what do you do with c?
12:34:07 <tangentstorm> javascript isn't an especially object oriented language.  but there are various ways to make things that look like traditional oo on top of it.
12:34:20 <tangentstorm> i mostly ignore it...
12:34:36 <tangentstorm> but i do have one small c program i may work on again...
12:34:52 <tangentstorm> https://github.com/tangentstorm/gotopaint
12:34:54 <tangentstorm> :)
12:35:44 <KipIngram> What purpose does c serve after all of the above?
12:35:50 <tangentstorm> for anything where most people use c, i currently use pascal, but an occasionally forthy style of pascal.
12:35:58 <tangentstorm> oh c 
12:36:00 <KipIngram> Other than the same purpose you could have gotten by saying int c =2;
12:36:01 <tangentstorm> the variable :D
12:36:29 <tangentstorm> i thought you meant if i was this bad at javascript...what would i do with c :) 
12:36:44 <tangentstorm> well basically it's a clone of the object but you can change it independently.
12:37:15 <KipIngram> No, I mean if you can't create a variety of functions that operate on an object (i.e., the member functions of its class) then what's all of that for?
12:37:31 <KipIngram> So it's like a pointer to the object?
12:37:43 <KipIngram> A different way of getting at the same memory?
12:37:57 <KipIngram> Or you mean it's a different object that behaves the same way?
12:38:08 <tangentstorm> ok so in forth you know how you can chain vocabularies together?
12:38:16 <KipIngram> Yes.
12:38:19 <tangentstorm> a prototype is like a vocabulary.
12:39:10 <tangentstorm> you can make chains of them... so it's a bit like inheritance because anything you don't override in the current vocabulary/prototype gets looked up in the previous one in the chain.
12:39:14 <tangentstorm> hrm.
12:39:27 <KipIngram> So you can associate a variety of functions with the prototype then?
12:39:39 <tangentstorm> actually that's probably a really good way to implement forth dictionaries in js... 
12:39:42 <tangentstorm> yes
12:40:10 <tangentstorm> did you see in the code where i said self=this ?
12:40:28 <tangentstorm> and then i created a function to return self
12:40:41 <tangentstorm> if i just said return this the behavior would be different.
12:40:58 <tangentstorm> self=this takes a snapshot of the 'this' value.
12:41:27 <KipIngram> So I'm trying to confirm that you can  create as many functions as you want that you can then call against an object?
12:41:45 <KipIngram> I would call that collection of functions the "class" associated with that object.  Or at least a facsimile of a class.
12:42:12 <tangentstorm> you can say:
12:45:36 <tangentstorm> function Class(arg) { return { val:arg, 'getValue':function(){ return this.val; }}}
12:46:57 <tangentstorm> var val = 5, obj = new Class(123); obj.getValue()
12:47:06 <tangentstorm> the result of obj.getValue() is 123.
12:47:26 <tangentstorm> er.. disregard the val=5
12:49:15 <KipIngram> Now.
12:49:20 <KipIngram> What *else* can I do with obj?
12:49:26 <tangentstorm> hold up
12:49:28 <tangentstorm> var somethingElse = { val:99 }; function WhatDoesThisDo(o) { return o.getValue(); } 
12:49:31 <KipIngram> obj.<something ot herthan getValue()).
12:49:39 <KipIngram> And how do I define those things?
12:49:54 <dzho> y'all have seen this, right? https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
12:50:40 <tangentstorm> hmmm... WhatDoesThisDo.call(somethingElse, obj)
12:50:40 <KipIngram> Sorry - at work.  Can't watch a video right now.
12:50:51 <tangentstorm> i really really really expected that to print 99
12:50:55 <tangentstorm> but it prints 123
12:51:03 <tangentstorm> so i still don't understand 'this'
12:51:37 <KipIngram> Here's my quandary over this.  To me the core essence of object oriented programming is to say "Hey, I've conceived this 'entity,' and for that entity I need data fields a, b, and c and on entities of that sort I want to do operations A, B, C, and D."
12:52:01 <KipIngram> So then I somehow write functions to define A, B C, and D, as well as functions to declare the needed data space, and somehow wrap it up so that when I say 
12:52:09 <KipIngram> x = new Entity
12:52:25 <KipIngram> I can then say x.A(...), x.B(...), etc.
12:52:37 <tangentstorm> yeah
12:52:38 <KipIngram> I'm just not seeing a clean path to that in anything you've descirbed so far.
12:52:40 <tangentstorm> you can do that
12:52:49 <KipIngram> Ok.
12:53:14 <KipIngram> Then B uses "this" in its definition, and I say x.B(...), then inside that execution stream "this" will refer to X.
12:53:15 <KipIngram> x
12:53:27 <tangentstorm> i'm just saying that there are situations where when you say   x.foo()  and   foo uses "this" ... this != x
12:53:36 <tangentstorm> most of the time it will.
12:53:38 <KipIngram> But if I say y.B(...) then "this" will refer to y.
12:53:45 <tangentstorm> most of the time it will.
12:54:53 --- join: epicmonkey (~epicmonke@188.134.41.113) joined #forth
12:56:23 <KipIngram> If it does something different some of the time then that's very confusing.
12:56:32 <tangentstorm> hmm.
12:56:34 <tangentstorm> okay.
12:56:46 <tangentstorm> no turns out you're right. 
12:59:47 <tangentstorm> function hi() { return this.msg; } var msg = 'ok', y = {msg:'hello'}; y.hi=hi; [ hi(), y.hi() ]
12:59:57 <tangentstorm> result is ['ok','hello']
13:01:20 <tangentstorm> the docs say that the act of calling   x.y() sets this to x for the duration of the call
13:02:53 <tangentstorm> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/this
13:02:58 <KipIngram> Yes - that last thing you typed is exactly what I was trying to say.
13:03:12 <KipIngram> Just much more cleanly stated than I managed... 
13:03:41 <tangentstorm> hmm
13:03:59 <tangentstorm> oh i know where the trouble comes in. it's with callbacks.
13:05:39 <tangentstorm> x = 99; function MyClass(){ this.x = 5; getX() { return this.x; } };  callback = new MyClass().getX ;  callback()
13:05:45 <KipIngram> How does a callback invoke a function without doing so through an object?
13:06:07 <tangentstorm> the rules we just established say callback should return 99
13:06:30 <tangentstorm> which is fine, but it's hard to remember sometimes.
13:06:44 <KipIngram> Wait.
13:06:49 <tangentstorm> especially when half of javascript is about callbacks.
13:07:01 <KipIngram> In that line of code x  and this.x look to have nothing to do with one another.
13:07:30 <tangentstorm> there are two objects.
13:07:32 <KipIngram> "this.x" implies that we are executing a method associated with some object, and that object also has a method called x.
13:07:34 <tangentstorm> one is the global object.
13:07:47 <KipIngram> Ok.
13:07:50 <KipIngram> Fair enough.
13:07:56 <tangentstorm> the global object can be anything.
13:08:00 <tangentstorm> it's just whatever 'this' is.
13:08:11 <KipIngram> So global.x and "this.x" don't necessarily refer to the same thing, or even the same sort of thing.
13:08:17 <tangentstorm> open the js console in a browser and type 'this' and it'll say window or somehing
13:09:20 <KipIngram> Or are you saying that every object effectively inherits the global object's characteristics?
13:09:31 <KipIngram> So when you say x=99, you're basically defining global.x as 99.
13:09:37 <tangentstorm> yes
13:09:54 <KipIngram> So then every object later on, unless you override, will also have a member x that has value 99?
13:09:55 <tangentstorm> well it means  this.x = 99
13:10:01 <tangentstorm> no
13:10:05 <KipIngram> Ok, what if I do this:
13:10:13 <KipIngram> Pardon my hand waving.
13:10:19 <KipIngram> x=99 (set global x)
13:10:29 <tangentstorm> i shouldn't have said global.
13:10:33 <tangentstorm> it's not global.
13:10:36 <KipIngram> create a new object called y.
13:10:39 <KipIngram> y.x=50.
13:10:47 <KipIngram> now what does plain old x equal?
13:10:57 <tangentstorm> 99
13:11:08 <tangentstorm> but it's not global.
13:11:25 <KipIngram> So y gets its own copy of the entire outer environment?
13:11:35 <KipIngram> Like, in this example, x?
13:13:36 <tangentstorm> x = 99; function MyClass(){ return { x:5, getX: function() { return this.x } }};  callback = new MyClass().getX ;  callback()
13:13:46 <tangentstorm> ^ corrected code after actually trying it
13:13:54 <tangentstorm> no
13:14:16 <tangentstorm> y is like its own vocabulary chained to whatever it's prototype is.
13:17:11 <tangentstorm> function chain(obj) { return obj }; x={val:0}; y = new chain(x); console.log(x,y); y.val=1; console.log(x,y); 
13:17:21 <tangentstorm> Object {val: 0} Object {val: 0}
13:17:23 <tangentstorm> Object {val: 1} Object {val: 1}
13:17:36 <tangentstorm> ugh. i screwed that up.
13:18:13 <tangentstorm> sorry. i don't understand 'this' well enough to explain its weird behavior, and we're off topic anyway.
13:30:01 --- join: Mat2 (~claude@91-65-144-133-dynip.superkabel.de) joined #forth
13:32:44 --- nick: bluekelp_ -> bluekelp
13:35:58 --- join: Nisstyre (~yours@oftn/member/Nisstyre) joined #forth
13:50:11 --- quit: Mat2 (Quit: Verlassend)
13:58:03 --- quit: nighty^ (Remote host closed the connection)
14:04:59 <tangentstorm> ok
14:05:02 <tangentstorm> function DROP(){return this.data.pop()} function ADD(){this.data.push(DROP.call(this)+DROP.call(this))}  function RUN(code){this.ip |= 0; while(this.ip<code.length){ var op=code[this.ip]; typeof op==='function' ? op.call(this) : this.data.push(op);  this.ip++}; return this.data}
14:05:09 <tangentstorm> ugly but simple.
14:05:25 <tangentstorm> RUN.call({data:[]}, [1,2,DROP,3,ADD])
14:05:33 <tangentstorm> result is [4]
14:07:18 <tangentstorm> I think maybe I can clean up most of the "this" keywords if i wrap the whole thing in a function.
14:10:11 <tangentstorm> ...
14:11:16 <tangentstorm> well if we do that, we don't even need 'this'.. we can just close over a local var data =[];
14:15:58 --- quit: Nisstyre (Quit: Leaving)
14:16:23 <true-grue> That's the right way to do it. In most situation you can easily avoid "this" or "new" keywords. Use lexical closures.
14:18:31 <tangentstorm> well that gets you a virtual machine but i'm shooting for somethingy dynamically extensible like forth
14:19:32 * tangentstorm is still experimenting...
14:23:28 <true-grue> JavaScript is taking the place of C as the portable assembler. Why not just use proven techniques of C-Forths then?
14:24:00 <tangentstorm> well because it's not c 
14:24:34 <tangentstorm> or.. like..
14:25:09 <tangentstorm> javascript itself already has all this stuff written in c that can be used for a forthlike system
14:25:12 <true-grue> Anyway you don't need to use in Forth the JavaScript parts which are non-C :)
14:26:00 <true-grue> Ah, Forth_like_ system!
14:26:25 <tangentstorm> yeah.. i'm building something :)
14:26:31 <true-grue> Ok :)
14:27:50 <tangentstorm> hrm
14:29:31 --- quit: true-grue (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
14:29:48 <tangentstorm> i work on ngaro.js for retroforth
14:30:14 <tangentstorm> ngaro being the virtual machine.
14:30:29 <tangentstorm> and it uses basically an array of instructions and an instruction pointer.
14:30:58 <tangentstorm> but the js vm itself already has that
14:37:48 <tangentstorm> i'm kind of thinking i can use function composition to let the javascript vm do most of the work
14:39:18 --- join: ZarutianWEB (c290546e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.194.144.84.110) joined #forth
15:03:55 --- quit: ncv (Remote host closed the connection)
15:22:34 --- quit: epicmonkey (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
15:45:03 --- quit: josvuk (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
15:53:16 --- quit: _spt_ (Quit: bye)
17:01:50 --- part: itsy left #forth
17:01:52 --- quit: impomatic (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90.1 [Firefox 22.0/20130618035212])
17:03:45 --- join: dessos_ (~dessos@c-174-60-176-249.hsd1.pa.comcast.net) joined #forth
17:05:05 --- nick: dessos_ -> dessos
17:30:32 --- quit: ttmrichter (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
17:30:45 --- quit: sirdancealot (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
17:32:34 --- join: ttmrichter (~ttmrichte@gertm.eu) joined #forth
17:52:20 --- join: sirdancealot (~sirdancea@98.82.broadband5.iol.cz) joined #forth
18:21:46 --- join: josvuk (~josef@p54ABEC39.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) joined #forth
18:22:46 <josvuk> hi, seeing words behaves strange. it shows me " Hello " type 
18:23:29 <josvuk> where I wrote in a colon definition ." Hello " not " Hello " type
18:23:33 <josvuk> why?
18:26:46 --- join: Kumool (~nmz@67.224.210.214) joined #forth
18:29:32 --- quit: Kumul (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
18:30:31 --- part: dessos left #forth
18:36:37 <ZarutianWEB> josvuk: is ." a IMMEDIATE word?
18:37:49 <ZarutianWEB> and what forth is it you are using gForth, eForth, Forth-83 or some other sort of ANS Forth?
18:41:03 <josvuk> my forth is the forth from of 3 think it is a sort of ans forth
18:42:30 <josvuk> I can type ." Hello "  and it prints Hello
18:43:09 <ZarutianWEB> try SEE ."
18:43:46 <josvuk> but if I wrote " Hello " type inside a colondef there comes a stack error 
18:45:40 <ZarutianWEB> now that is strange
18:46:40 <ZarutianWEB> but looking at the implementation of ." should be informing
18:46:45 --- quit: sirdancealot (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
18:46:47 <josvuk> see ."         :  ." ^8693.1733 state? if ['] type ^8688.7934 else type then ;
18:48:57 <KipIngram> That said that regardless of whether you are complying our not ." Parses the text up to the closing quote from the input stream.
18:49:49 <KipIngram> Then, if you are compiling it compiles that into the definition followed by a call to type.
18:50:09 <KipIngram> If you're interpreting it just calls type immediately.
18:50:44 <ZarutianWEB> complying? you meant compiling, KipIngram, yes?
18:51:01 <KipIngram> Yes.
18:51:13 <KipIngram> Sorry.  Auto correct in Swype.
18:51:52 <KipIngram> But it looks like it's compiling type first and then the string.
18:53:33 <ZarutianWEB> josvuk: does this answer your question somewhat?
18:53:53 --- join: sirdancealot (~sirdancea@98.82.broadband5.iol.cz) joined #forth
18:54:03 <josvuk> hm, yes somewhat thx :-)
18:55:40 <KipIngram> josvuk: Do you get a stack error at compile time or when you run the word?
19:00:33 --- join: Nisstyre (~yours@oftn/member/Nisstyre) joined #forth
19:03:59 <josvuk> hm, I don't know what I did ..... but now there is no error  compiling with " Hello " type :-(
19:04:24 <KipIngram> " or ." ?
19:04:38 <josvuk> is there a way for tracing backwards ? to see what I did ...
19:04:50 <KipIngram> Up arrow?
19:06:47 <KipIngram> " and ." Are totally different things.
19:07:11 <josvuk> both works " Hello " type and ." Hello " in a colon definition anyway the compiler makes a ." to be " type when seeing
19:07:42 <KipIngram> Yes.
19:08:00 <KipIngram> But exactly how did you get the stack error?
19:08:41 <KipIngram> ." Often can't be run interactively.
19:09:02 <josvuk> hm, I m working on it ..... but cant produce the stack error twice .....
19:09:05 <KipIngram> Not a whole lot of point in typing a string right back at yourself.
19:09:59 <KipIngram> " just puts a strong on the stack.  What happens if you do this: 
19:10:18 <KipIngram> : test " hello" ;
19:10:26 <KipIngram> And then
19:10:35 <KipIngram> test
19:11:05 <ttmrichter> In gforth that's an error.
19:12:08 <josvuk> " puts two items on the stack 0 and 4286896824 wich is porbably the biggest number available
19:12:28 <ttmrichter> Which Forth are you doing this in?
19:12:55 <josvuk> of-3 forth
19:13:04 <ttmrichter> of-3?
19:13:57 <josvuk> now I have typed type and the whole screen is scrolling characters. how to interrupt it ctrl-c?
19:14:05 <KipIngram> :-)
19:14:07 <josvuk> yes openfirmware 3
19:14:19 <ttmrichter> Ah, that can be actually searched.
19:14:52 <ZarutianWEB> josvuk: aah, okay. On a Sun or Macintosh?
19:15:27 <ZarutianWEB> (machine that is)
19:16:15 <josvuk> Im on ibook 500 apple ...
19:18:48 <ZarutianWEB> just poking around the firmware for fun? Then this http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19957-01/801-5123-10/fcode.Preface.html might help you to understand openfirmware
19:19:58 <ZarutianWEB> and <Cmd+þ> might stop the scrolling (Havent tried on my old iMac CRT A so I do not know)
19:20:34 <ZarutianWEB> Cmd+. was it supposed to be
19:22:42 <josvuk> hm I found ctrl+y on a qwertz keyboard stopped the scrolling and wrote user-abort ... :-) thx for the of doc's apple deleted his for technotes about of ... :-(
19:23:38 <ZarutianWEB> Tried to dig through the Internet Archives?
19:29:05 <josvuk> ah, yes used it but not for searching for the technote do you mean the wayback machine or is there something better?
19:29:40 <ZarutianWEB> I have only used the wayback machine.
19:30:52 <josvuk> ok. will see .....
19:44:39 --- quit: josvuk (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
20:22:13 --- quit: Nisstyre (Quit: Leaving)
21:38:00 --- quit: tangentstorm (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.2)
22:36:49 --- quit: ZarutianWEB (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
23:27:34 --- join: true-grue (~quassel@95-26-208-120.broadband.corbina.ru) joined #forth
23:28:13 --- quit: true-grue (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
23:29:23 --- join: true-grue (~quassel@95-26-208-120.broadband.corbina.ru) joined #forth
23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/13.08.01