Learning ANSI Forth
sdd...@internetmci.com
I would like to know the best way of going about learning ANSI compatable
forth. My environment will be on a PalmPilot, using Neal Bridges Quartas,
which is, as best as I can tell, for the most part ANSI compatable.
I have a couple of Forth books, but they are old, and are definitely not
very compatable with ANSI forth. Specifically, I would like to learn about
the 'non-trivial' words, ie: Catch, Throw, etc, String Manipulations,
etc... the stuff that's needed
for commercial type programs. The books I have (Starting Forth, Thinking
Forth, and forgot the other one...) are good
enough for stack manipulations, arithmetic, but they fall way short in
non-trivial applications...
Thanks in advance...
news.mci2000.com
Paul E. Bennett
sdd...@internetMCI.com "news.mci2000.com" writes:
Forth Inc's new book "The Forth programmers handbook" would be one that
should grace your shelf now. Also grab a copy of my coding standards from
the web site http://www.forth.org/ to use as a style guide.
At this years EuroForml I am talking about certification of Forth source
code in a joint paper with Malcolm Bugler.
--
Paul E. Bennett ................... <p...@transcontech.co.uk>
Transport Control Technology Ltd. <http://www.tcontec.demon.co.uk/>
+44 (0)117-9499861 <enq...@transcontech.co.uk>
Going Forth Safely
Elizabeth D. Rather
You can order "The Forth Programmer's Handbook" from FIG at that
address, or from us; there's a convenient fax-in order form at
www.forth.com (our commercial web site, not to be confused with
www.forth.org, which is FIG).
It provides complete coverage of ANS Forth plus a number of common
extensions.
Cheers,
Elizabeth
--
===============================================
Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc. +1 310-372-8493
111 N. Sepulveda Blvd. Fax: +1 310-318-7130
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
http://www.forth.com
"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
===============================================
Dave Kenny
come from people with consumer-oriented systems who simply do not
realize how much clutter their messages have when viewed through
other software. (I use `tin' BTW)
Since Elizabeth is clearly no "novice user" I'm curious what benefit
is realized by using MIME etc on vanilla text. Can anyone clue me
in?
Elizabeth D. Rather <era...@forth.com> wrote:
: This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
: --------------7E1007467B9703B988A85218
: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
: --
<Actual text snipped>
: ===============================================
: Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
: FORTH Inc. +1 310-372-8493
: 111 N. Sepulveda Blvd. Fax: +1 310-318-7130
: Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
: http://www.forth.com
: "Forth-based products and Services for real-time
: applications since 1973."
: ===============================================
: --------------7E1007467B9703B988A85218
: Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
: Content-Description: Card for Elizabeth D. Rather
: Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
: begin: vcard
: fn: Elizabeth D. Rather
: n: Rather;Elizabeth D.
: org: FORTH, Inc.
: email;internet: era...@forth.com
: note: http://www.forth.com
: x-mozilla-cpt: ;0
: x-mozilla-html: FALSE
: end: vcard
: --------------7E1007467B9703B988A85218--
Elizabeth D. Rather
>
> I've always assumed MIME or HTML encapsulated mail and news postings
> come from people with consumer-oriented systems who simply do not
> realize how much clutter their messages have when viewed through
> other software. (I use `tin' BTW)
>
> Since Elizabeth is clearly no "novice user" I'm curious what benefit
> is realized by using MIME etc on vanilla text. Can anyone clue me
> in?
Alas, my laptop (which generated this mess) is running MS Outlook98,
and insists on all the first garbage. On many newsreaders, you have an
option to not display it...
As to the address, I think it's useful to let folks know where to
find us. I get a lot of messages from people asking us to send them
info, but we have to go through another cycle because they _didn't_
have a full address.
Cheers,
Elizabeth
--
Elizabeth D. Rather
>
> Dave Kenny wrote:
> >
> > I've always assumed MIME or HTML encapsulated mail and news postings
> > come from people with consumer-oriented systems who simply do not
> > realize how much clutter their messages have when viewed through
> > other software. (I use `tin' BTW)
> >
> > Since Elizabeth is clearly no "novice user" I'm curious what benefit
> > is realized by using MIME etc on vanilla text. Can anyone clue me
> > in?
>
> Alas, my laptop (which generated this mess) is running MS Outlook98,
> and insists on all the first garbage. On many newsreaders, you have
> an
> option to not display it...
Oops, on closer examination I find the offending message came from
Netscape 4.0 at my office. The stuff below is, indeed, optional,
and I have turned off that feature (although, again, a lot of folks
like it--it looks pretty if your browser supports vcards).
Dave Kenny
: Oops, on closer examination I find the offending message came from
: Netscape 4.0 at my office. The stuff below is, indeed, optional,
: and I have turned off that feature (although, again, a lot of folks
: like it--it looks pretty if your browser supports vcards).
In my previous post, it appears that I may have been carried away by
curmudgeonly zeal. If the MIME stuff adds functionality NON-
DESTRUCTIVELY (like the stereo subcarrier in FM radio which lets
nonstereo sets receive an un-degraded mono signal) I certainly
don't want to obstruct its availability.
So, what are vcards? And are they a cosmetic thing or do they have
information value?
Elizabeth D. Rather
"Virtual business cards" carrying smail addr, phone#, etc., formatted
nicely by HTML. Basically the sort of stuff I carry in my text
signature file, so in my case no info you don't already have. You can
add them directly into your "address book" in modern browsers/email
pkgs.
They'll be swell when most folks are using browsers that handle them.
Cheers,
Elizabeth
Bernd Paysan
> In my previous post, it appears that I may have been carried away by
> curmudgeonly zeal. If the MIME stuff adds functionality NON-
> DESTRUCTIVELY (like the stereo subcarrier in FM radio which lets
> nonstereo sets receive an un-degraded mono signal) I certainly
> don't want to obstruct its availability.
>
> So, what are vcards? And are they a cosmetic thing or do they have
> information value?
If they did, a simple
X-vcard: http://xxx.yyy.com/~zzz/vcard.vcf
in the header would do it and would be invisible on readers that don't
support this sort of thing.
--
Bernd Paysan
"Late answers are wrong answers!"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/
Greg Alexander
>"Virtual business cards" carrying smail addr, phone#, etc., formatted
>nicely by HTML. Basically the sort of stuff I carry in my text
>signature file, so in my case no info you don't already have. You can
>add them directly into your "address book" in modern browsers/email
>pkgs.
>
>They'll be swell when most folks are using browsers that handle them.
I really don't like the implication of 'when'.
--
Greg Alexander - also <gral...@indiana.edu> - http://sietch.home.ml.org/
----
Sometimes a sig is just a sig.
Greg Alexander
wrote:
>Dave Kenny wrote:
>> In my previous post, it appears that I may have been carried away by
>> curmudgeonly zeal. If the MIME stuff adds functionality NON-
>> DESTRUCTIVELY (like the stereo subcarrier in FM radio which lets
>> nonstereo sets receive an un-degraded mono signal) I certainly
>> don't want to obstruct its availability.
>>
>> So, what are vcards? And are they a cosmetic thing or do they have
>> information value?
>
>If they did, a simple
>
>X-vcard: http://xxx.yyy.com/~zzz/vcard.vcf
>
>in the header would do it and would be invisible on readers that don't
>support this sort of thing.
MS, as a policy, does not read the standards about mail extensions.
Netscape, as a policy, tries to outdo MS. One of them probably originated
the idea. Ho hum.
Anton Ertl
"Elizabeth D. Rather" <era...@forth.com> writes:
[vcards]
> They'll be swell when most folks are using browsers that handle them.
I use a browser to browse the WWW. I use a newsreader to read Usenet
news, and I don't intend to change that.
Vcards, MIME-multi-part postings and HTML articles look to me like an
attempt by Netscape to do to Usenet what they have done to the WWW:
spreading their own extensions in order to spread their browser.
Fortunately, the Usenet community apparently is not as stupid as many
WWW designers and resists.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
Allen Ethridge
an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote:
>I use a browser to browse the WWW. I use a newsreader to read Usenet
>news, and I don't intend to change that.
>
>Vcards, MIME-multi-part postings and HTML articles look to me like an
>attempt by Netscape to do to Usenet what they have done to the WWW:
>spreading their own extensions in order to spread their browser.
>Fortunately, the Usenet community apparently is not as stupid as many
>WWW designers and resists.
Since this thread is already far afield of Forth ...
Are you a Luddite, or do you just prefer Microsoft's monopolization
standards instead?
Allen
Andrew Haley
: In article <6o9med$6g1$1...@news.tuwien.ac.at>,
: an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote:
Mmm... Can you say "fallacy of the excluded middle"?
There's nothing Luddite about not wanting extra gunk in mail and news.
The most appropriate and efficient use of networking technology to
transport a business card is to insert a URL into an article, not the
business card itself. Obviously! That's what URLs are for.
Looking at the broader picture, Vcard is "push" technology, where the
sender decides what should be received: inserting a URL is "pull"
technology, where the recipient decides. Apart from any efficiency
considerations, the latter is far more polite.
I'm sure that those who are familiar with the clusterFORTH design
guidelines will recognize the distinction: only a client knows what
information it needs, so a client always initiates and controls a
transaction.
Andrew.
John Passaniti
Anton Ertl wrote in message <6o9med$6g1$1...@news.tuwien.ac.at>...
>Vcards, MIME-multi-part postings and HTML articles look to me like an
>attempt by Netscape to do to Usenet what they have done to the WWW:
>spreading their own extensions in order to spread their browser.
>Fortunately, the Usenet community apparently is not as stupid as many
>WWW designers and resists.
MIME is not a Netscape invention. It is an attempt to come up with a
standard framework for sending multipart "multimedia" messages
(translation-- the ability to send eight-bit files without transports
screwing it up, with type attribution so the client knows how to interpret
it).
HTML articles are also not a Netscape invention. HTML is a decent
presentation language for "rich" text, and it is a logical format for that.
Microsoft is big on the HTMLization of everything, and you know what-- it
makes a lot of sense. Incidentally, Microsoft's implementation of HTML
articles is intelligent. When an HTML article is sent, a plaintext version
is also sent (as a MIME attachment). People can choose which to view based
on their capabilities. Makes sense to me.
I don't really see the value in Vcards. As such, I simply ignore them.
Like everything else on the Internet, Vcards will be subject to natural
selection. If people like them, they will thrive and more software will
support them. If people don't care, you'll see that standard fade like so
many before it.
John Musielewicz
> Anton Ertl wrote in message <6o9med$6g1$1...@news.tuwien.ac.at>...
> >Vcards, MIME-multi-part postings and HTML articles look to me like an
> >attempt by Netscape to do to Usenet what they have done to the WWW:
> >spreading their own extensions in order to spread their browser.
> >Fortunately, the Usenet community apparently is not as stupid as many
> >WWW designers and resists.
>
> HTML articles are also not a Netscape invention. HTML is a decent
> presentation language for "rich" text, and it is a logical format for that.
> Microsoft is big on the HTMLization of everything, and you know what-- it
> makes a lot of sense.
HTML in email and newsposting is just plain annoying. Its as stupid
as frames in web pages.
> Incidentally, Microsoft's implementation of HTML
> articles is intelligent. When an HTML article is sent, a plaintext version
> is also sent (as a MIME attachment). People can choose which to view based
> on their capabilities. Makes sense to me.
>
It wastes space and doubles the download size. Not very intellegent.
They should stick with plain text.
Sent using LXTCP and the HP 200LX
"A portable solution"
Anton Ertl
"John Passaniti" <jp...@servtech.com> writes:
>
> Anton Ertl wrote in message <6o9med$6g1$1...@news.tuwien.ac.at>...
> >Vcards, MIME-multi-part postings and HTML articles look to me like an
> >attempt by Netscape to do to Usenet what they have done to the WWW:
> >spreading their own extensions in order to spread their browser.
> >Fortunately, the Usenet community apparently is not as stupid as many
> >WWW designers and resists.
>
MIME-multi-part messages in Usenet postings are a Netscape invention,
AFAIK.
> It is an attempt to come up with a
> standard framework for sending multipart "multimedia" messages
Discussion groups are not the right forum for "multimedia" messages.
> HTML articles are also not a Netscape invention.
Care to name a newsreader that preceded Netscape in posting HTML?
> HTML is a decent
> presentation language for "rich" text
*Usenet* has developed its own _markup_ conventions, some of which are
not even expressible in HTML:-).
> Incidentally, Microsoft's implementation of HTML
> articles is intelligent. When an HTML article is sent, a plaintext version
> is also sent (as a MIME attachment). People can choose which to view based
> on their capabilities. Makes sense to me.
If it's the same information, it makes little sense. If the HTML
contains more information, it makes even less sense. In any case, it
wastes a lot of bandwidth and is quite annoying to me, and probably to
anyone else who does not use MS's or Netscape's software (and that's
probably the whole point of these things).
lis...@zetnet.co.uk
On 1998-07-17 jp...@servtech.com said:
:HTML articles are also not a Netscape invention. HTML is a decent
:presentation language for "rich" text, and it is a logical format
:for that. Microsoft is big on the HTMLization of everything, and
:you know what-- it makes a lot of sense.
Only to people who use HTML-capable newsreaders and emailers. Not to
mere mortals, like me, who have to make do with plaintext tools. (And,
for that matter, an awful lot of people on the net - and you know what?
MS' older tools can't cope with it either, and a lot of people won't
have upgraded yet. So it doesn't make that much sense.)
:Incidentally, Microsoft's
:implementation of HTML articles is intelligent. When an HTML
:article is sent, a plaintext version is also sent (as a MIME
:attachment). People can choose which to view based on their
:capabilities. Makes sense to me.
That's not intelligent. That's overkill. Anyone with a plaintext reader
and no MIME is stuck reading both. And that's without Microsoft's half
arsed redefinition of a perfectly good characterset standard. ("Smart"
quotes? Come on, if they were that smart they wouldn't look so stupid on
non-MS software.)
--
Communa (together) we remember... we'll see you falling
you know soft spoken changes nothing to sing within her...
Jerry Avins
far as I can see, the only advantage to the sender is the thrill of
being "with it". And if the recipients don't care, will the senders know
that and switch? Those who use Vcards now (for the thrill, their image,
or any other reason of perception) will probably stay with them - at
least until they become passe. I get much more information from
Elizabeth Rather's present signature than I got from "Vcard for
Elizabeth Rather", but she wouldn't have known that if no one had told
her.
Jerry
--
If my address has "x" or "z" in it, remove them to reply.
"I view the progress of science as ... the slow erosion of the
tendency to dichotomize." Barbara Smuts, U. Mich.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
John Passaniti wrote:
>
...
Luis
to use the data at a later stage. I personally don't see it as much of a
time saver, but I can see how some might find this facility useful.
Luis.
--
____________________
LuiS CoMMiNS
lu...@anachreon2.com (delete '2' to reply)
DeDiCaTeD To DeSiGN
Mark A. Flacy
information. Life is easier for such applications if there is a set format
for where the name goes, the e-mail address, phone numbers, etc.
Of course, vcards aren't as human readable and certainly less
individualistic than signature blocks.
Anton Ertl
ethr...@onramp.net (Allen Ethridge) writes:
> In article <6o9med$6g1$1...@news.tuwien.ac.at>,
> an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote:
> >attempt by Netscape to do to Usenet what they have done to the WWW:
> >spreading their own extensions in order to spread their browser.
> >Fortunately, the Usenet community apparently is not as stupid as many
> >WWW designers and resists.
> Are you a Luddite, or do you just prefer Microsoft's monopolization
> standards instead?
I guess you mean Luddite in the meaning "any opponent of technological
progress" (www.dictionary.com is wonderful:-).
Yeah, I probably am, otherwise I would have dropped Forth a long time
ago and switched to Pascal, then C, then C++, then VB, then Java, then...
OTOH, maybe these changes and the changes that Netscape tries to
impose have more to do with fashion fads than technological progress?
lis...@zetnet.co.uk
On 1998-07-25 an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at(AntonErtl) said:
:> Are you a Luddite, or do you just prefer Microsoft's
:>monopolization standards instead?
:I guess you mean Luddite in the meaning "any opponent of
:technological progress" (www.dictionary.com is wonderful:-).
Shame the original Luddites were more anti-capitalism than
anti-progress, really. Neo-Luddites, or techno-Luddites, on the other
hand...
:Yeah, I probably am, otherwise I would have dropped Forth a long
:time ago and switched to Pascal, then C, then C++, then VB, then
:Java, then...
I miss the days of 8-bit processors and the sufficiency of 64K. I can't
imagine why a program would need to be bigger. If a compiler makes a
250k "Hello World" program, there's something wrong, and I want to be
able to reach for an assembler and put one together in a few bytes. 32
bits is nice, because you don't have to worry about precision, but
surely that should only have doubled program size, not raised it by
several orders of magnitude...?
(sayeth the guy who just ordered a 486 machine with 8Mb. It was nice...
and I don't envisage ever having to upgrade again, unless I start
working from home. I'm keeping the XT. :P )
-- Communa (together) we remember... we'll see you falling
you know soft spoken changes nothing to sing within her...
Net-Tamer V 1.08X - Test Drive