Forth in oblivion

[akk]

Now Forth has even dropped completely from tiobe index:
http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

Comes from beating this horse dead, instead of feeding it with
innovation...

[Mark Wills]

No. From the web site:

"The index is updated once a month. The ratings are based on the number of skilled engineers world-wide, courses and third party vendors."

There's the reason.

[hughag...@yahoo.com]

Since I don't have a college degree, I'm not an engineer skilled or unskilled.

Anyway, I wouldn't put too much stock in lists like that --- they have Lisp below Pascal and almost falling off the list, although Lisp has always been and always will be the most important language in the computer-science field.

[visua...@rocketmail.com]

When Forth is in oblivion, then it is time to reinvent Forth !

[Rod Pemberton]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 03:06:00 -0500, <visua...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, February 16, 2014 1:21:09 PM UTC-5, akk wrote:

>> Now Forth has even dropped completely from tiobe index:
>>

>> Comes from beating this horse dead, instead of feeding it with
>> innovation...
>
> When Forth is in oblivion, then it is time to reinvent Forth !

Why?

[Albert van der Horst]

In article <53010196$0$6654$9b4e...@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>,

I see that Factor is in the list of languages that exist, and
apparently Forth doesn't exist.

Tell you what? This only serves to totally destroy Tiobe's
credibility to me.


Groetjes Albert

>
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[visua...@rocketmail.com]

On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:15:04 AM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 03:06:00 -0500, <visualforth.com> wrote:
>
> > When Forth is in oblivion, then it is time to reinvent Forth !
>
> Why?

It is time to reinvent Forth because Forth isn't present at any important new movement:
There is no connection between Forth and the Maker Movement, the DIY Movement, the FIRST Movement, the Open Source Hardware Movement, and may be even more.

There should be a connection to OSHA at least.

I have the feeling all new developments for the new and the future generations of computer and microprocessor software developers is missing. That's why I wrote "it is time to reinvent Forth"

[Rod Pemberton]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:52:46 -0500, <visua...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:15:04 AM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 03:06:00 -0500, <visualforth.com> wrote:

>> > When Forth is in oblivion, then it is time to reinvent Forth !
>>
>> Why?
>
> It is time to reinvent Forth because Forth isn't present at any

> important new movement: [examples]

Basically, you've declared that Forth should be used for things
simply because it isn't currently ...

I'm left to wonder from where exactly does this positively pompous
position on Forth come from?

So, I have no other choice but to question the rationale.

Should we resurrect other extinct things too, say the Rocky Mountain
locust?

American farmers weren't able to grow crops in the west while it
existed. America wouldn't have become the "bread basket" of the
world if it existed. All other food growing regions of the world
must deal with locusts. I.e., some things make humanity better
simply by being extinct.

I can think of many reasons as to why Forth shouldn't be resurrected,
modified, or reinvented, i.e., allowed to die and become extinct.

The most important of which is there is no programmer demand for Forth.

The second important of which is that other languages are doing the
jobs needed by those new and exciting projects, i.e., no need.

There is no demand or need for a warmed over, patched up, enhanced,
Forth suitable for such "new" jobs that you mentioned either. It
seems that most people would rather start from scratch with a new
programming languages in order to put their hated memories of other
languages perceived as being flawed to rest.

Having "dead" languages, like Forth, Pascal, Modula, Fortran, COBOL,
Lisp, etc., among the mix of choices for programming languages only
serves to confuse people, delay the inevitable, and waste resources.
You should notice that I didn't list other old languages like C or
BASIC or PL/I etc as being among the "dead."

So, why should a language - apparently decided to be not suitable
for those projects by the projects' authors - be touted for them?


Rod Pemberton

[visua...@rocketmail.com]

On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:16:26 PM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:52:46 -0500, <visualforth.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:15:04 AM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> >> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 03:06:00 -0500, <visualforth.com> wrote:
>
> >> > When Forth is in oblivion, then it is time to reinvent Forth !
>
> >> Why?
>
> > It is time to reinvent Forth because Forth isn't present at any
> > important new movement: [examples]
>
> Basically, you've declared that Forth should be used for things
> simply because it isn't currently ...

No.

I am using Forth since thirty years now, and I didn't need any other programming language for my projects. Forth is a great programming tool which makes programming easy. I am electrical engineer, having started my career using relays and later TTL ICs before discovering microprocessors. I don't have any formal education in programming despite a one hour lesson in FORTRAN and a half day course in BASIC.

I started programming forty years ago writing programs in machine language, eventually developing a little VM to make my work easier. When I heard about Forth, I stopped further development on my own VM, switching over to Forth, and Forth made it possible to do all these projects over the years. I used Forth for testing hardware, too. One of my projects was a MC68332 board for PKI which I only could test because I got a Forth running on this microprocessor. My best programming experience was with the RTX2000. I had several projects with this great machine until it was discontinued.

> I'm left to wonder from where exactly does this positively pompous
> position on Forth come from?

I am biased with Forth, as you can see. Forth served me well.
Most of my projects I couldn't have done without Forth.

> So, I have no other choice but to question the rationale.
> Should we resurrect other extinct things too, say the Rocky Mountain
> locust?

I am not familiar with the farming business, I am electrical engineer.
But a farmer would be able to write his programs using Forth.

> I can think of many reasons as to why Forth shouldn't be resurrected,
> modified, or reinvented, i.e., allowed to die and become extinct.

I read the same attitude today about Microsoft with Windows XP.
Microsoft ends the support for XP and urges millions of people to buy new computers. This is outrageous. 50% of all Chinese computers have Windows XP.
Is Microsoft your employer? It sounds like that. Why should an outstanding tool become extinct instead of becoming promoted?

> The most important of which is there is no programmer demand for Forth.

No wonder if there is nobody promoting Forth in education for the next generation of potential programmers! That's why Forth has to be reinvented!

> The second important of which is that other languages are doing the
> jobs needed by those new and exciting projects, i.e., no need.

The beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you are not used to Forth, you won't use Forth for your projects. If nobody showed you how to successfully use Forth, you won't be used to Forth.

> There is no demand or need for a warmed over, patched up, enhanced,
> Forth suitable for such "new" jobs that you mentioned either.

I didn't ask for a warmed over, patched up, enhanced Forth - I asked for reinventing Forth. In all these years again and again I read about people who tried to invent some tool like Forth, in other words, they tried to reinvent Forth. But they didn't get it done.

> It seems that most people would rather start from scratch with a new
> programming languages in order to put their hated memories of other
> languages perceived as being flawed to rest.

Looks like you are biased, too - the opposite direction.
I am sorry to read about your hated memories of Forth.
I am wondering why you are a member of c.l.f.
The only answer may be that you are waiting for a reinvented Forth which will be a lovable tool for you.

By the way, I can prove you wrong concerning "most people would rather start from scratch". Embedded Systems Design wrote recently: "One of the great mysteries of the embedded market is why design teams don't migrate all code development to new tools like MATLAB or LabView and free themselves of the drudgery of C? Our guess is the legacy code base is large and needs to be supported and that it would take a very brave engineering team to abandon all that code and risk a failed project."
Source: http://www.embedded.com/design/prototyping-and-development/4372666/Shifting-sands--Trends-in-embedded-systems-design

> Having "dead" languages, like Forth, Pascal, Modula, Fortran, COBOL,
> Lisp, etc., among the mix of choices for programming languages only
> serves to confuse people, delay the inevitable, and waste resources.

You got that wrong. Forth is a living language.
There will be confusion if you don't know Forth.

> You should notice that I didn't list other old languages like C or
> BASIC or PL/I etc as being among the "dead."

I guess BASIC and PL/I are your favorite languages.
For Lucent Technologies I had to develop a manufacturing tool in VB.
I learned VB while using it. I liked it very much, but it was boring after a while. I would have preferred to have a VF instead, a VisualFORTH.
Ten years I waited for a VF, then I wrote it by myself. It's easier to use than VB. Since then I do all my Windows projects with VF.

> So, why should a language - apparently decided to be not suitable
> for those projects by the projects' authors - be touted for them?

It's simple. People are different.
There are people in this world who appreciate Forth.
Forth should be promoted, because it is a great tool.
The problem is that there are dozens of Forth books and tutorials, but hardly a good introduction why Forth is the natural choice of programming.
I am working on that.

I am wondering about reading your comments on c.l.f. while Forth apparently has been decided by you to be not suitable for your projects?

> Rod Pemberton

But thanks for your comments, Rod, anyway.
You are the only one who commented for now.
Aren't there any other people on c.l.f. who are using Forth for their projects?

Dirk Bruehl

[AKK]

Am 19.02.2014 04:05, schrieb visua...@rocketmail.com:

> But thanks for your comments, Rod, anyway.
> You are the only one who commented for now.
> Aren't there any other people on c.l.f. who are using Forth for their projects?
>
> Dirk Bruehl
>

We left it many years ago due to the lack of skilled developpers AND TOOLS.

Whatever excellent the Forth micro-development and testing system may
seem (or be essential to some individuals) it is just a flexible DSL on
assembler level.

And whatever silly the tiobe index is, it just reflects the fact that
today's requirements for small systems (eg micro PLCs) have expanded to
far wider levels (say communication, UIs, data) than the old grass roots
level where Forth still is dwelling .. or should I say dwindling.

[Andrew Haley]

visua...@rocketmail.com wrote:
>
> I didn't ask for a warmed over, patched up, enhanced Forth - I asked
> for reinventing Forth. In all these years again and again I read
> about people who tried to invent some tool like Forth, in other
> words, they tried to reinvent Forth. But they didn't get it done.

That's true. Forth is rather like Lisp in this regard: people have
tried many times to invent new Lisp-like languages but it remains a
great improvement on all of its sucessors. Mind you, Lisp, like
Forth, is very malleable: modern Lisps are different from, say, LISP
1.5.

Andrew.

[Andrew Haley]

Rod Pemberton <dont_us...@xnohavenotit.cnm> wrote:
> I can think of many reasons as to why Forth shouldn't be resurrected,
> modified, or reinvented, i.e., allowed to die and become extinct.
>
> The most important of which is there is no programmer demand for Forth.

But, strangely, you are still here. Why is that?

Andrew.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:05:27 -0500, <visua...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:16:26 PM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:52:46 -0500, <visualforth.com> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:15:04 AM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:

>> I can think of many reasons as to why Forth shouldn't be resurrected,
>> modified, or reinvented, i.e., allowed to die and become extinct.
>
> I read the same attitude today about Microsoft with Windows XP.
> Microsoft ends the support for XP and urges millions of people to buy
> new computers. This is outrageous.

Why?

> 50% of all Chinese computers have Windows XP.

The simple fact that the Chinese are using XP is a good enough reason
right there to kill it ... ;-)

But, what exceptionally low percentage of those computers do you believe
had XP legally purchased and installed in China?

> Is Microsoft your employer? It sounds like that.

No.

> Why should an outstanding tool become extinct instead of
> becoming promoted?

Microsoft is a for profit corporation. Maintaining an operating system
for you costs them money. Selling another operating system to you
generates money for them. So, why should they settle for selling you one
operating system when they can sell you five, ten, twenty or more operating
systems in your lifetime?

>> There is no demand or need for a warmed over, patched up, enhanced,
>> Forth suitable for such "new" jobs that you mentioned either.
>
> I didn't ask for a warmed over, patched up, enhanced Forth - I asked for
> reinventing Forth.

If not a warmed over, patched up, enhanced Forth, then this goes to the
point I've Hugh about numerous times. At what point is Forth no longer
Forth but some other new language? I.e., you might as well start from
scratch and fix all the know issues with Forth too, e.g., oddly named
ANS Forth words, use of names AND OR XOR instead symbols like & | ^ (from
C).

>> It seems that most people would rather start from scratch with a new
>> programming languages in order to put their hated memories of other
>> languages perceived as being flawed to rest.
>
> Looks like you are biased, too - the opposite direction.

I was talking about other people in general from what I've seen.

> I am sorry to read about your hated memories of Forth.

I was thinking about the anti-Microsoft FSF/GNU/FOSS crowd who prefer to
kill the old and start anew. Most of those projects you cited are by
people
from the same crowd.

I don't have hated memories of Forth, although I'm not fond of the
language.
It lacks many of the language features that make C preferred to assembly.
I can code in assembly and did so just the other day, but I'd rather not if
I have the choice.

> I am wondering why you are a member of c.l.f.

I've coded a Forth interpreter. The early generations were mostly C.
The current generation is mostly Forth with some C.

> The only answer may be that you are waiting for a reinvented Forth which
> will be a lovable tool for you.
>

No. C is the answer. Although, an ITC interpreter for Forth is useful
outside of a Forth language context. It can be used as the backend for
other interpreted languages or for parsing.

> By the way, I can prove you wrong concerning "most people would rather
> start from scratch". Embedded Systems Design wrote recently: "One of the
> great mysteries of the embedded market is why design teams don't migrate
> all code development to new tools like MATLAB or LabView and free
> themselves of the drudgery of C?

Drudgery? It must be a biased article. TIOBE rankings proves that C and
derivatives are the dominant languages. If C was truly "drudgery," would
it be so successful over such a long time period?

> Our guess is the legacy code base is large and needs to be supported
> and that it would take a very brave engineering team to abandon all
> that code and risk a failed project.

That seems highly doubtful to me. All you'd need is an FFI to allow
access to C libraries from your language.

FFI
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_function_interface

> You got that wrong. Forth is a living language.

It is? Where is it alive?

Forth <- dead
OpenFirmware <- dead
PostScript <- dead

Forth seems to succeed in obscure embedded systems
where there is no attention to it from the public:
Kitt Peak telescopes, FedEx package tracking, etc.

Every time Forth is involved in a high profile
project it seems to lead to failure: VALDOCS,
Easywriter, Harris processors, and possibly OLPC ...

> There will be confusion if you don't know Forth.

Why?

I know, or have known, many programming, scripting, and batch languages.

I.e., I can make the same claim about C, or just about any other language
I've ever experienced. But, the claim would only be truthful about C.

>> You should notice that I didn't list other old languages like C or
>> BASIC or PL/I etc as being among the "dead."
>
> I guess BASIC and PL/I are your favorite languages.

C is my favorite. PL/I is as powerful as C, but isn't as widely
available as C. This is rumored to be due to the complexity of
producing a compiler for it. Forth is as widely available as C,
but not used anywhere near as much. BASIC was a favorite once,
but it lacked structured coding concepts. FORTRAN, I absolutely
hated. Pascal was just about useless. I've seen BASIC used
very effectively in industry for machine control. Assembly for
6502, 68000, 80x86 are what they are.

> For Lucent Technologies I had to develop a manufacturing tool in VB.
> I learned VB while using it. I liked it very much, but it was boring
> after a while. I would have preferred to have a VF instead, a
> VisualFORTH. Ten years I waited for a VF, then I wrote it by myself.
> It's easier to use than VB. Since then I do all my Windows projects
> with VF.
>

Is it going to replace VB in the world? If not, all VF does is create
source code which is incompatible with all other languages and understood
by very few, if any.

E.g., there ia a guy named Herbert Kleebauer who posts to alt.lang.asm.
He's a very skilled 80x86 (Intel and AMD PC) assembly programmer. However,
he codes x86 assembly using 68000 style syntax. He wrote his own
assembler.
Almost no one who codes x86 assembly understands 68000 style syntax. And,
it's nearly impossible to convert his syntax to syntaxes commonly used on
x86: GNU GAS, Microsoft MASM, and NASM. So, no one uses his code.

The point is businesses have the same problem. They need their code to be
coded in the languages that best fit with the commonly available skills
of programmers in the marketplace.

>> So, why should a language - apparently decided to be not suitable
>> for those projects by the projects' authors - be touted for them?
>
> It's simple. People are different.
> There are people in this world who appreciate Forth.

That's fine. I appreciate BASIC. Except for lacking structured coding
concepts, it was a great language to learn general programming. It's
string processing abilities are far simpler and more effective than any
other language, including C and Forth. But, I don't code in BASIC anymore.
Although, I would if an employer paid me to do so.

> Forth should be promoted, because it is a great tool.

There are lots of great tools in the world. Do you own an chainsaw, adze,
hog ring pliers, or a trim router? No, I don't either ... But, I do own
hammers, pliers, wrenches, saws, ax, crowbar, etc, which can do many of
the same jobs, or can be used to do jobs they weren't designed to do.

The point is Forth is competing with other languages which all get the
same job done. So, even if Forth is the "perfect" tool for the job, if
another cheaper, easier, and commonly available tool which programmers
are skilled with is available for use, then it will be used instead.
C is widespread and many people are skilled in it.

> I am wondering about reading your comments on c.l.f. while Forth
> apparently has been decided by you to be not suitable for your projects?

No, I use C. I am developing my own language. Originally, I was
developing
my own C compilers. I still am or may be or might not ... However, a C
compiler is more complicated than creating your own language. So, now, I'm
truly conflicted between using C and my language. Why? The same reason
that
affected Herbert. No one will use the code if it's not in a language they
understand or they can use. So, the other option is to force my language
to look and act like C as much as is possible, or perhaps return to coding
my C compilers, or perhaps a C subset.


Rod Pemberton

[Rod Pemberton]

I'm surprised you don't know the answer or, more likely, can't
remember it. FYI, I've answered that question a dozen times now,
and again for "visual..." whatever monicker guy.

Of course, for each of the people who have asked me that,
except the new "visual..." whatever monicker guy, I have
asked the following or something similar to it:

If you don't post any Forth code, don't help new people when they
request it, mostly discuss ancient Forth history and argue about
trivial specification semantics, then why are *you* here?

You could've provided useful posts to the new people but didn't.
Instead, you were spending your time arguing with Anton and Bernd.
So, if you don't like simply seeing informative responses from
me, you could've replied.


Rod Pemberton

[Stefan Mauerhofer]

I think Chuck tried once to reinvent Forth. His approach is colorForth.

[Andrew Haley]

Rod Pemberton <dont_us...@xnohavenotit.cnm> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 05:09:46 -0500, Andrew Haley
> <andr...@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote:
>> Rod Pemberton <dont_us...@xnohavenotit.cnm> wrote:
>
>>> I can think of many reasons as to why Forth shouldn't be resurrected,
>>> modified, or reinvented, i.e., allowed to die and become extinct.
>>>
>>> The most important of which is there is no programmer demand for Forth.
>>
>> But, strangely, you are still here. Why is that?
>
> I'm surprised you don't know the answer or, more likely, can't
> remember it. FYI, I've answered that question a dozen times now,
> and again for "visual..." whatever monicker guy.

No, you haven't. You said that

> I'm working on getting my ITC Forth interpreter in C to pass the
> remaining 1/3rd or so of Hayes core. Except for a handful of
> primitives (in C), a bunch of variables, and a few parsing words
> (compiled Forth in C), much of it is now coded in Forth (as ASCII
> text).

Which, of course, is no answer at all. Why implement a weak language
for which there is no demand?

> Of course, for each of the people who have asked me that,
> except the new "visual..." whatever monicker guy, I have
> asked the following or something similar to it:
>
> If you don't post any Forth code, don't help new people when they
> request it, mostly discuss ancient Forth history and argue about
> trivial specification semantics, then why are *you* here?

Which, of course, is no answer at all.

Andrew.

[Stanley Daniel de Liver]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 23:16:26 -0000, Rod Pemberton
<dont_us...@xnohavenotit.cnm> wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:52:46 -0500, <visua...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:15:04 AM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 03:06:00 -0500, <visualforth.com> wrote:
>
>>> > When Forth is in oblivion, then it is time to reinvent Forth !
>>>
>>> Why?
>>

[]

>
> I can think of many reasons as to why Forth shouldn't be resurrected,
> modified, or reinvented, i.e., allowed to die and become extinct.
>
> The most important of which is there is no programmer demand for Forth.
>

Rod, you can't hope to tell an (x) based newsgroup that there's no call
for (x) unless you want a negative reaction.
I think that's called trolling.
There's probably 0 demand for anyone's home grown OS or minimal C
implementation either, but why not just let people be.

>
> Rod Pemberton


--
It's a money /life balance.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 16:17:22 -0500, Stanley Daniel de Liver
<notag...@invalid.org.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 23:16:26 -0000, Rod Pemberton
> <dont_us...@xnohavenotit.cnm> wrote:

<OT>

>> The most important of which is there is no programmer demand for Forth.
>>
> Rod, you can't hope to tell an (x) based newsgroup that there's no call
> for (x) unless you want a negative reaction.

Sure I can. I don't have to hope to tell. I have done so many times a
month. That's what I believe. You can't stop me. I've been posting
here for at least seven years now... Whether my message falls on deaf
ears or reaches the willfully blind is a different issue. My belief is
no matter how hard you try to block a message, no matter how resilient
some people are in rejecting it, it does get through to most, eventually,
when it's the truth. Then, once they realize it's the truth, things
begin to slowly change, and eventually build momentum.

Any negative reaction towards me in regards to what I say is symptomatic of
your psychological hang-ups, not mine, in regards to hearing the truth.
I.e., I can't help you cure your negative emotional responses towards
others
or what they express. That's something you have to learn how to handle for
yourself or pay a psychologist for. They're going to tell you the same
thing I just told you. Pay-up? It's called self-control.

I will continue to reveal what I recognize as the truth as long as I decide
to post here which will probably be until I deem my Forth interpreter
project finished, or maybe longer ... I like a few people here. So, it
could be a while. Meaning, there is no point in you whining about it
either.
You're not the first. You really have no ability to change any of my
actions
or thoughts on the subject.

> I think that's called trolling.

AIUI, trolling is intentionally attempting to incite and cause anger.

There is a huge difference between that and expressing the truth even if
it's contradictory to the faith that most here have. Of course, I express
it here because I think it's good for those here to actually discuss the
issue of how Forth performs relative to other languages. Without such
discourse, Forth will simply continue to die.

Everyone here says they don't want Forth to die, but they don't practice
what they preach. They're letting it happen, letting Forth die, by
rejecting
the reality that Forth as-is just can't compete with other languages.
They've
got their heads buried in the sand. Their words and actions don't match.

It's not until Forth users actually accept the truth, instead of rejecting
any and all criticism, and deal with it in a positive, and healthy manner,
instead of a hostile and negative one, that they can begin move forward
with progress and perhaps save Forth from imminent death.

> There's probably 0 demand for anyone's home grown OS [...]

That seems to be true. Yet, it hasn't stopped at least a dozen people
I know of from producing them. In that regard, it must be considered to
be a form of individual self-expression like artwork, or an issue of pride,
or a measure of strength of will or self-determination, or an enjoyable
use of time, or perhaps an intellectual challenge.

Of course, I thought *exactly* same thing when I heard about Linux many
years ago: no point, doomed to failure, nearly impossible to succeed. If
it had remained a personal project of one individual, it probably would've
failed by the mid 1990's.

Well, it took me two decades of attempts with dozens of distro's too poorly
implemented to be of any real use as an OS, and a decade for Linux to dump
it's horrible ext2 filesystem, but here I am today - about 23 years later
from when I first heard of Linux - posting from a Linux which supports
*all*
my hardware for the first time ever. It has a nice GUI too. It also has
multiple media players and multiple internet browsers. In fact, they're
same ones you can use with Windows. Of course, without immense continued
funding, Linux is going to run straight into a wall, stagnate, or suffer
bit-rot. It seems to be showing some bit-rot already.

Linux is competing against a wealthy commercial producer of an OS and is
fighting a difficult battle against numerous individuals and entities with
all sorts of property rights which are required to implement many aspects
of a full featured OS. The funding needed to acquire licenses for those
rights is almost non-existant while the funding needed to protect those
rights is almost infinite.

After experiencing Unix SysV, I never would've believed I would *ever*
be using *nix for my OS. I still don't like the OS, but once you're
in a GUI, if you don't have any serious problems with Linux itself,
and you are able or have someone who can adjust it or set it up for you,
it's not bad now. As a GUI OS, it's not near Windows level of excellence,
performance, functionality, but it's not bad at all.

> [...] or minimal C implementation either, [...]

There is actually a bit of interest in the latter. A number of minimal
C implementations have attracted users of the past few years. That
actually surprised me a bit. Clearly, there is a severe lack of speed
and functionality from such an implementation. For a long while, it seemed
I was the only one interested.

These reduced compilers seem to be of interest mostly among those in the
OS development crowd. Bootstrapping a compiler and toolchain is an issue
for every new OS. So, simpler compilers are attractive. Otherwise, you
have to cross-compile (meta-compile to you) your OS. That means your OS is
dependent on another full-featured OS like Windows or Linux to be compiled.


Rod Pemberton

[Elizabeth D. Rather]

On 2/23/14 8:18 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> There is a huge difference between that and expressing the truth even if
> it's contradictory to the faith that most here have. Of course, I express
> it here because I think it's good for those here to actually discuss the
> issue of how Forth performs relative to other languages. Without such
> discourse, Forth will simply continue to die.
>
> Everyone here says they don't want Forth to die, but they don't practice
> what they preach. They're letting it happen, letting Forth die, by
> rejecting the reality that Forth as-is just can't compete with other languages.
> They've got their heads buried in the sand. Their words and actions don't match.

The problem here is defining "truth". What you may have experienced as
"truth" is at great variance with what those of us who have used Forth
in serious projects have experienced as "truth". The issue for language
survival isn't so much "truth" (as, "which language is more powerful,
etc.") it's which has been better promoted, found acceptance due to
familiarity and peer pressure, etc. These are largely subjective issues,
not "truth".

Cheers,
Elizabeth

--
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================

[hosti...@gmail.com]

Hello comp.lang.forth (I've never posted here before!)

On 2/23/14 8:18 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:

> Everyone here says they don't want Forth to die, but they don't practice
> what they preach. They're letting it happen, letting Forth die, by
> rejecting the reality that Forth as-is just can't compete with other languages.
> They've got their heads buried in the sand. Their words and actions don't match.

On Monday, February 24, 2014 2:44:47 AM UTC-5, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:

> The problem here is defining "truth". What you may have experienced as
> "truth" is at great variance with what those of us who have used Forth
> in serious projects have experienced as "truth". The issue for language
> survival isn't so much "truth" (as, "which language is more powerful,
> etc.") it's which has been better promoted, found acceptance due to
> familiarity and peer pressure, etc. These are largely subjective issues,
> not "truth".

I'll raise a hand and personally define what Elizabeth just said there to be an instance of "truth". :-)

I think all the not-on-the-Tiobe-index languages share a common pain of trying to explain their value. Kids today (and even some adults) don't understand the Catch-22 of "your language isn't popular, so I won't take any time to look at it". (If regardless of merit, how can anything new get popular, if people only look at things that are built on infrastructure that is already popular?)

I use a Forth-inspired language called Rebol, which also not on the Tiobe index. But if you've eaten Dannon Yogurt (for example), it may be have been one of the containers packed by robots controlled by software from Atronix Engineering...written in Rebol. Is that enough to make someone who only knows JavaScript look into why to invest in a better language that isn't mentioned in job listings?

(Let me answer that from experience. The answer is: no.)

Lately I've been trying to help evangelize a new and exciting Rebol-family language called Red. And having noticed that traction is not very easy to get with the JavaScript/C#/Java crowd, I've noticed by contrast that enthusiasm seems to build quicker with people who have surveyed lesser-known languages like Forth, Haskell, Haxe, etc.

This inspired me to do some research. I'd like to get an answer to the question of: "For the dedicated members of the Forth community, what needs is Forth meeting that Rebol (today) and Red (tomorrow) can't meet?"

We believe what we're building is a *true* full-stack language; one binary to rule them all, zero-install, cross-compiling, under 1 megabyte. Is that crazypants? Might sound it, but it's a real thing!

http://www.red-lang.org/p/contributions.html

I'll admit a lack of Forth knowledge personally (though many in the Rebol community have used it). But skimming Wikipedia I see:

: FLOOR5 ( n -- n' ) DUP 6 < IF DROP 5 ELSE 1 - THEN ;

Later expressed more succinctly as:

: FLOOR5 ( n -- n' ) 1- 5 MAX ;

So Rebol is not stack-based. *But* being homoiconic you can build stack-based dialects if you need them, and switch evaluative contexts on a dime. So we can talk about that, and maybe we should? But anyway, in the default evaluator we'd just write that as:

floor5: function [v] [either (v < 6) 5 [v - 1]]

Note that Rebol is case-insensitive. EITHER here is a ternary operator; the first is the condition, then a true-branch value and a false-branch value. Branches may be in a block, and blocks by convention evaluate to their last value. (Which is why there's no return.)

FUNCTION takes two arguments; a specification block and a body block. And because EITHER is a function taking arguments like any other, you can put your code and values in variables:

floor5: function [v] [
condition: (v < 6)
true-branch: 5
false-branch: [v - 1]
either condition true-branch false-branch
]

Or given that the whole language is homoiconic, you could save that code in a block... to either evaluate or use as data, if that made more sense:

code: [floor5: function [v] [either (v < 6) 5 [v - 1]]]

And if you wanted to you could iterate it with the same series APIs you use for strings, binaries, etc. The first symbol is of type SET-WORD!, the second is a WORD!, then you have a BLOCK! containing the single WORD! v, then another BLOCK! with a WORD (either) followed by a PAREN! block containing three elements, etc. etc. Lisp on steroids with Forth heritage.

We've got lots of goodies and borrowed things, like CASE:

foo: quote bar:
case [
integer? foo [
print "Foo is an integer."
]
set-word? foo [
print ["Foo is a set-word!, and its spelling is" to-string foo]
]
true [
print "Case takes expressions and code blocks, runs first block that matches"
]
]

So rather than be in oblivion, I'm wondering if we can team up and share knowledge? We are still at the design input phase for Rebol v.3 (open source Apache2 as of 12-Dec-2012!) and Red has been BSD since the beginning. So getting input from Forth users would be great for us. We're a friendly and thriving community on StackOverflow chat, and there's a good vibe to it:

http://rebolsource.net/go/chat-faq

So as the kids on the playground might say: can you and I be friends? :-) Or even if we have to stay on separate paths, I'd like to know *why*. What's the missing feature that our Forth-inspired language didn't take, which is leading to your lack of satisfaction? If this isn't the right place or people to ask that question, where should I be taking it?

Thanks for reading!

Best,
--Brian

P.S. http://blog.hostilefork.com/why-rebol-red-parse-cool/

[Rod Pemberton]

On Sun, 02 Mar 2014 07:36:40 -0500, <hosti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> [snip, circular reasoning]

>
> I use a Forth-inspired language called Rebol, which also not on the
> Tiobe index. But if you've eaten Dannon Yogurt (for example), it may be
> have been one of the containers packed by robots controlled by software
> from Atronix Engineering...written in Rebol. Is that enough to make
> someone who only knows JavaScript look into why to invest in a better
> language that isn't mentioned in job listings?
>
> (Let me answer that from experience. The answer is: no.)
>
> Lately I've been trying to help evangelize a new and exciting
> Rebol-family language called Red. And having noticed that traction is
> not very easy to get with the JavaScript/C#/Java crowd, I've noticed by
> contrast that enthusiasm seems to build quicker with people who have
> surveyed lesser-known languages like Forth, Haskell, Haxe, etc.
>
> This inspired me to do some research. I'd like to get an answer to the
> question of: "For the dedicated members of the Forth community, what
> needs is Forth meeting that Rebol (today) and Red (tomorrow) can't meet?"
>

Didn't I ask the same thing here about C, repeatedly? ...

I.e., I don't see how asking the same question about another language
obtains an answer that no one here is willing to provide in regards to C.

> We believe what we're building is a *true* full-stack language;

There are many full-stack languages. Why is this language "*true*"?

> one binary to rule them all,

That won't work.

Different machines have different architectures and instruction sets.
There will need to be code specific to each platform. A singular
binary, even if it includes code for multiple architectures, will not
execute on multiple platforms because of conflicts between the executable
binary formats for each platform. For a single binary to work, you'd need
need some code custom to each OS, at which point, it's no longer a single
binary. In addition to "one binary to rule them all", you'd have a choice
of a executable loader for each OS, or a JIT compiler for each OS, or an
interpreter for OS. Coding an executable loader for each OS is not
possible for modern OSes due to security. that leaves JIT compiler, like
Java, or an interpreter, like Forth. At which point, you must ask why
are you "reinventing the wheel"?

You may need to look at TenDRA's ANDF and Java's VM to understand
how to implement write once, execute anywhere, software. You could
also look at a stack-based interpreter, like Forth.

> zero-install,

You have to obtain resources, like memory, from the OS. This may be
temporary or transient in nature instead of permanent, but that doesn't
mean the language wasn't installed, temporarily.

> cross-compiling,

Why? Why would you even need this?

I.e., this completely contradicts your "one binary to rule them all"
theory. You wouldn't need cross-compiling *at all* if your "one binary
to rule them all" theory actually worked in reality.

> under 1 megabyte.

Stack? Slower than registers ...
Interpreted? Slow ...
Compressed? Slow ...
JIT compiling? Slow ...
Virtual machine? Slowest ...

> Is that crazypants?

What's the point?

> Might sound it, but it's a real thing!
>
> http://www.red-lang.org/p/contributions.html

...

> [big snip, un-exciting language]

>
> So rather than be in oblivion, I'm wondering if we can team up and share
> knowledge? We are still at the design input phase for Rebol v.3 (open
> source Apache2 as of 12-Dec-2012!) and Red has been BSD since the
> beginning. So getting input from Forth users would be great for us.
> We're a friendly and thriving community on StackOverflow chat, and
> there's a good vibe to it:
>

Honestly, I doubt that anyone here read your post due to where you
posted it in this thread. Most were expecting a reply to Ms. Rather
responding to me being critical, i.e., your post was likely unread.

You should've posted a top level post to discuss Red, Rebol, Haxe, etc.
I.e., start a new thread. Put the word "ANNOUNCE" or "ANN" in the
subject line. Mention Rebol, or Red and Haxe, and make some exuberant,
outrageously unrealistic claim in the subject line. E.g.,

"ANN: REBOL the 1st TRUE stack language will devour the World!
Join us, today Forther and be converted."


Rod Pemberton

[hosti...@gmail.com]

On Monday, March 3, 2014 2:30:51 PM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> [snip, snip, snip epic rudeness]

Whoever this "Rod Pemberton" is... dude's got issues. e.g. Instead of following the download link to find that I meant 1MB binary *per-platform* (though any binary can compile from any platform to any other), he chose to write an essay about how "bytecodes and executable formats are different". I suppose for some people it's easier to write than to read?

Whatever. Rod: *never* reply to anything I write on the Internet again. I'll do the same in return. That's a good deal: take it.

---

However, I will take his suggestion and write a top-level post to attract more attention...and assume he does not speak for the Forth community overall (in spirit or in technology).

Best,
--Brian

[Paul Rubin]

hosti...@gmail.com writes:
> following the download link to find that I meant 1MB binary

Red looks kind of interesting, but by Forth standards 1MB is gigantic
bloatware. Forth historically provided a complete interactive
development and application environment on minicomputers with 16K or so
of memory. Today its main application niche is embedded
microcontrollers of comparable size. There are even Forth-specific CPU
architectures that can run Forth code much more efficiently (in terms of
silicon resources) than conventional processors can run conventional
code. On my 64-bit Linux desktop, Gforth (a full featured
implementation with lots of creature comforts though without a built-in
IDE) has a 136K binary.

Regarding Rebol, the red-lang slide "Natural scope of application" puts
Rebol as comparable to scripting languages like Python. Forth is more
comparable to C in that it's close to the hardware, uses raw memory
addresses, normally uses static or manual memory allocation (a
Boehm-style GC is available as a library), etc. It easily finds its way
into real-time control applications where scripting languages aren't
suitable. The Red/system subset might be comparable to this, based on
the slides--I haven't looked at it closely.

[hosti...@gmail.com]

Hi Paul, thanks for the *polite* reply. :-)

On Monday, March 3, 2014 7:53:01 PM UTC-5, Paul Rubin wrote:

> Red looks kind of interesting, but by Forth standards 1MB is gigantic
> bloatware. Forth historically provided a complete interactive
> development and application environment on minicomputers with 16K or so
> of memory.

I see. Based on what you're telling me, I can see why maybe the Forth community never had much interest in Rebol. Red is a different ball of wax, though; it may share syntax and surface semantics, but it's a ground-up reimplementation. And the size of the tool says nothing about the size of what code it produces; although the bang for buck if you use Red vs. Red/System is pretty impressive.

Would you say that most of the application scope for Forth is based on this aspect of "smallness", instead of necessarily any particular language ergonomics? Is there any notable stakeholder in Forth for whom 16K vs 1MB does not matter, and they're using it for other reasons? I'm just trying to get the lay of the land a bit.

> Regarding Rebol, the red-lang slide "Natural scope of application" puts
> Rebol as comparable to scripting languages like Python. Forth is more
> comparable to C

It sounds to me like what you're saying is that Forth may be more directly comparable to Red/System than to Red. I wouldn't have known that.

We talk about this notion of a "full stack" because Red "compiles what it can, JIT-compiles what it can't compile ahead of time, and interprets the homoiconic residual that defies either form of compilation". That is the three levels of the tower:

http://meta.stackoverflow.com/ads/display/210389

In the midst of this, Red/System is the IL...but you can also program in it directly. It uses the syntax structure of Red, but it doesn't have the meta-programming capacity. The Red compiler can process raw Red/System code (if the header starts with Red/System [...] instead of Red [...]) and it can also seamlessly embed Red/System code inline in a Red program.

Are there any good open source Forth projects--*actively used* (so a commit in the last year)--perhaps targeting embedded--that I might look at? I'd like to see if I could put together a document like "Red/System for Forth programmers" or something like that. And if there's a real Achilles heel in what we're doing, I'd like to find it!

Best,
--Brian

[Rod Pemberton]

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 18:34:13 -0500, <hosti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, March 3, 2014 2:30:51 PM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:
>> [snip, snip, snip epic rudeness]

Rude? Said a guy who is apparently doing nothing of value with
his life while waiting for his elderly parents to die so he can
inherit something. Rude enough? Yeah, I didn't think so either ...

Did you know that Google Groups posted your IP to Usenet?
I bet you didn't ... You really shouldn't post to Usenet while
using Google Groups. It's truly amazing what information
you can track down from just an IP or a name. FYI, try posting
to Usenet via AIOE.org next time to obscure your IP.

Your name is Brian F Dickens, roughly 40 years old, likely living
with your elderly parents at their beach house in a small city
called Amelia roughly fourty miles outside Jackonsville, FL.
It appears to be an 1800 square foot house built in the 1930's.
From the satellite photo, it has a long pier to a boathouse.

Scary? Don't take this too hostily or seriously. I was just
being a dick because you're being a dick, Dick.

> Whoever this "Rod Pemberton" is... dude's got issues.

Why are you insulting me? Dude, I didn't insult you. Asshole!

Yes, it's true that Usenet groups are not as polite as forums or
a Google Group, but I don't see where I said something hostile.
I also don't see where I deserve your diatribe.

> e.g. Instead of following the download link to find that
> I meant 1MB binary *per-platform*

What's a matter with you, can't you write that? Why must I go on
a "snipe hunt" to find out what YOU *supposedly* meant? Shouldn't
your words express what YOU *actually* meant? Think about it.

And, I did follow the first link you posted:
http://www.red-lang.org/p/contributions.html

It goes to a webpage of exuberant, flowery, inflated language for
the "Red Programming Language". It doesn't even go to the one about
Rebol which you were discussing. It just mentions that some Red
programmers happen to like Rebol and "hang out" in a Rebol forum.

> (though any binary can compile from any platform to any other),

What's the point? I asked that before. Maybe, answer the questions
asked instead of taking offense and whinning about other things just
to whine.

> he chose to write an essay about how "bytecodes and executable
> formats are different".

Yes, I was attempting to have a conversation with someone who
seemed overly exuberant and not really clear on the issues.

Replying to you in your excited and/or happy state was clearly a
mistake on my part. I knew better. I now have to reply to you
in your depressed and/or angry state.

> I suppose for some people it's easier to write than to read?

There is nothing on the webpage with the link that indicates that
1MB binary is per platform. In fact, it states exactly what I
thought you stated, but supposedly not what you meant:

"The tool doesn’t depend on anything besides what came with your
OS...shipping as a single executable that’s smaller than a megabyte."

Where's the "per platform"? I'm not blind. I don't see it. Do
I need to go to the download page to find this out?

> Whatever.

The tone of my reply was no different than yours and just as polite,
at least, I thought so.

I was attempting to discuss some of the problems you or your cohorts
were likely to face. So, I'm really not sure why you took offense.

> Rod: *never* reply to anything I write on the Internet again.
> I'll do the same in return. That's a good deal: take it.

Some might take that statement as a threat ... Should I?


Rod Pemberton

[hosti...@gmail.com]

On Monday, March 3, 2014 9:05:47 PM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> >> [snip, snip, snip epic rudeness]
>
> Rude? Said a guy who is apparently doing nothing of value with
> his life while waiting for his elderly parents to die so he can
> inherit something. Rude enough? Yeah, I didn't think so either ...

Um... maybe I missed the part of this conversation where I am hiding my location and name. I use my name in public...and you can find out things about me if you like, besides inaccurate readings on my geographic location.

If you read a bit more you would know I have a Summa Cum Laude degree in Electrical Engineering and that I was hired to work for Microsoft Research at age 20, by the guy who was the first dev lead of Word, Excel, and Access...and worked at Xerox PARC. I'm sort of imagining your credibility isn't at that level, given your "don't you know different platforms have different executable formats" humorous tirade.

All I know about Rod Pemberton is he is displaying what I would label "pathology". Should I be scared? Maybe my parents should be--because they're at the house in that satellite photo you found... not me. On the one hand, maybe I should call and warn them:

"Hey mom and dad, crazy guy on Forth Usenet is stalking you now, sorry. My fault for trying to talk to people on the Internet, I guess. Forth? Um, it's a programming language...I was just trying to see if there was some overlap between what they're doing and what we're doing. Why is he looking up satellite photos of your house? Okay, er...sorry about that, and I can't claim to know the answer to that question. I think he's crazy. Are you in danger? Well, he doesn't seem very smart, but that doesn't make him not dangerous. Probably harmless--but if you find a flaming Zilog Z80 on your doorstep, call my cell."

On the other hand--seriously--what is your deal, dude? I can help connect you with doctors and medication. Life gets hard, I understand. I'll work you through it if you need help: br...@hostilefork.com. 323-207-6382

Best,
--Brian

[Stefan Mauerhofer]

Hi Brian

I followed your link to the Red Programming Language. I think the concept is interesting. I liked the division between Red and Red/System (manual and automatic memory management (MM)).

Instead of trying to combine everything into one language, I'm using Forth for solutions with manual MM and Lisp for automatic MM.

Currently I'm trying to implement Lisp on top of a Forth implementation but it is nice to see that other people came basically to the same solution for similar problems.


@Rod & Brian: Life is too short and precious for wasting your time with flame wars. Stick to the subject, respect each other and avoid getting personal.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:42:03 -0500, <hosti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> All I know about Rod Pemberton is he is displaying what I would label
> "pathology".

I attempted to have polite and serious discussion of the issues that would
be faced with Red and Rebol, subjects *YOU* brought up that almost no one
here is really interested in. I did you a favor just discussing it and
replying
to it. You knew you didn't post it where others would even see it. Others
here might take a look at Red or Rebol, but that's about it. Most are
Forth
fanatics who ignore anything non-Forth and usually take offense to it too.
In my reply, I attempted to explain that your novice descriptions of Red or
Rebol could do were faulty or ignorant, which they were and still are.
And,
then you *chose* to insult me for no reason whatsoever, and claimed I was
rude
for validly, and intelligently replying to your messed up, ignorant post.
Why'd
you post if you didn't want people to respond? WTF? Are you retarded? It
seems
so. Only assholes post and don't expect a response or reject responses.

Yeah, so, apparently, it's utterly and blatantly obvious that a someone
stoic
like me is the one present who is displaying the narcisistic, neurotic,
paranoid,
self-deluded, sociopathic behavior, er... "pathology" ... It's called
projection.
I.e., you're projecting *your* faulty personality onto me:


Rod Pemberton
P.S. Is this a joke? This seems to be the same vile despicable person
we knew as Passanitti or a clone ...

[hosti...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, March 4, 2014 2:54:08 AM UTC-5, Stefan Mauerhofer wrote:
> Hi Brian
>
> I followed your link to the Red Programming Language. I think the concept is interesting. I liked the division between Red and Red/System (manual and automatic memory management (MM)).

(...)

> Currently I'm trying to implement Lisp on top of a Forth implementation but it is nice to see that other people came basically to the same solution for similar problems.

This is exactly what I am curious about. It sounds like you are building a similar solution. We do have a few spare cycles to bring people into the loop; what if we could solve your problem? Is this source available?

In this worldview, Red is your "Lisp" and Red/System would be your "Forth". It would be incredibly valuable to know what it is about your solution that drives you. If you cant be a "customer" (as it were) then we learn from that feedback. I am interested in that feedback.

> @Rod & Brian: Life is too short and precious for wasting your time with flame wars. Stick to the subject, respect each other and avoid getting personal.

Rod's reaction is not garden-variety flamewar. It's creepy and stalkerish. He apparently has a lot more interest in me than I have in him (I have zero interest). I just hope he's not dangerous.

Best,
--Brian

[Rod Pemberton]

On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 21:42:03 -0500, <hosti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> All I know about Rod Pemberton is he is displaying what I would label
> "pathology".

I attempted to have polite and serious discussion of the issues that

would be faced with Red and Rebol. I have no idea what triggered your
wrath and I still don't ... Those were subjects *you* brought up that
almost no one here is really interested in, as if you didn't know that
already. I did you a favor just discussing your topics and replying

to it. You knew you didn't post it where others would even see it.

Others here might take a look at Red or Rebol, but that's about it.
Most are Forth fanatics who ignore anything non-Forth and usually take

offense to just mentioning other languages. In my reply, I attempted to

explain that your novice descriptions of Red or Rebol could do were faulty
or ignorant, which they were and still are. And, then you *chose* to

insult me for no reason whatsoever, and claimed I was rude for me to
validly,
and intelligently reply to your messed up, wrong, and ignorant post. WTF?
Why'd you bother to post if you didn't want people to respond? Are you
retarded? It definately seems so from *my* perspective ... Only assholes
post and don't expect a response, or intentionally insult people
afterwards.
Do you reject Christmas gifts from your family too? Insensitive ...

Yeah, so, apparently, it's utterly and blatantly obvious that someone
very stoic like me is the one present who is displaying the narcisistic,

neurotic, paranoid, self-deluded, sociopathic behavior, er... "pathology".

FYI, I was talking about you, not me. That was sarcasm, something you
probably don't grasp. Sociopaths and psychopaths are notorious for having
issues comprehending sarcasm, and have difficulty with compassion and
empathy, as you demonstrated previously by calling me rude when I wasn't.
In case you don't know, what you did is called psychological projection.

I.e., you're projecting *your* faulty personality onto me:

Psychological Projection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Make sure you read the last line of the first paragraph. No, it wasn't
me or anyone I know who put it there. Yes, it accurately describes you.


Rod Pemberton
P.S. Is this a joke? From the verbiage, this seems to be the same vile
and despicable person we knew as John Passiniti or his dimwitted clone ...

[Rod Pemberton]

On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 16:49:53 -0500, <hosti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Rod's reaction is not garden-variety flamewar. It's creepy and
> stalkerish. He apparently has a lot more interest in me than I have in
> him (I have zero interest). I just hope he's not dangerous.
>

Stop spreading your lies asshole. You chose to insult me. I did
*nothing* to inspire your wrath. I posted a polite response to your post.
You're the asshole in this scenario. It's best if you just admit it,
apologize for your misdeeds. Then, we can move on.


Rod Pemberton

[Stefan Mauerhofer]

> This is exactly what I am curious about. It sounds like you are building a similar solution. We do have a few spare cycles to bring people into the loop; what if we could solve your problem? Is this source available?
>

Yes it is. I presented it at the last Forth Day in November 2013. Basically it is a try to implement a system the way I would like to have it. The implementation is native, not based on any other OS, directly on top of the hardware, running only on 64-bit PCs (for the moment). The GUI is LCARS, taken from Star Trek.
The source can be found here:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/smflos

FLOS means Forth & Lisp Operating System

>
>
> In this worldview, Red is your "Lisp" and Red/System would be your "Forth". It would be incredibly valuable to know what it is about your solution that drives you. If you cant be a "customer" (as it were) then we learn from that feedback. I am interested in that feedback.
>

Exactly, the similarities are obvious. The difference is that I'm using very old, very known languages to implement and join both (static & dynamic) worlds, instead of creating a new unified one. I don't know where does this lead me to or if it is a good solution at all. For the moment it is still a personal fun project.

-Steve

[Anton Ertl]

Paul Rubin <no.e...@nospam.invalid> writes:
>On my 64-bit Linux desktop, Gforth (a full featured
>implementation with lots of creature comforts though without a built-in
>IDE) has a 136K binary.

This binary just contains the engine, the image loader and some
support functions. I wonder what makes it so big. Anyway, the major
part of the functionality is in the image, and that's 354KB on AMD64
(64-bit threaded code is not particularly space-efficient).

- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2013: http://www.euroforth.org/ef13/

[hosti...@gmail.com]

Look, everyone I've shown this thread to says the mistake I made is talking to you--period. Please get some notaries to sign off on your reactions as reasonable, and list those notaries. If you can't get anyone to publicly back you (much less privately) it might make you think a little.

It's only my general desire to answer those who outreach to me that leads me to respond. And like I said, you apparently have a lot more interest in me than I do in you. You clearly need help, and I'm worried that people who need help and to whom the world says "ignore" might get lost. See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellbanning

I don't like that answer to "problem children". Yet that's the answer that "reasonable" people tell me I should take. I like to think I'm the person who is brave enough to test the waters a little, at some personal risk--(apparently, given your satellite stalking of my parents).

If you want to talk to me, fucking grow a pair and call me on the phone. This has nothing to do with Forth, just your mental problems.

Best,
--Brian

[Peter Percival]

Mark Wills wrote:
> On Sunday, February 16, 2014 6:21:09 PM UTC, akk wrote:
>> Now Forth has even dropped completely from tiobe index:
>>
>> http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Comes from beating this horse dead, instead of feeding it with
>>
>> innovation...
>
> No. From the web site:
>
> "The index is updated once a month. The ratings are based on the number of skilled engineers world-wide, courses and third party vendors."
>
> There's the reason.

Reading on: "Popular search engines such as Google, Bing, Yahoo!,
Wikipedia, Amazon, YouTube and Baidu are used to calculate the ratings.
Observe that the TIOBE index is not about the best programming language
or the language in which most lines of code have been written."

Might one express that as "The TIOBE index is about "search engines" (*)
and not about programming languages"?

(* Scare quotes because since when have Wikipedia, Amazon, YouTube and
Baidu been search engines?)

--
Madam Life's a piece in bloom,
Death goes dogging everywhere:
She's the tenant of the room,
He's the ruffian on the stair.

[Andrew Haley]

hosti...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello comp.lang.forth (I've never posted here before!)

Hi!

> So rather than be in oblivion, I'm wondering if we can team up and
> share knowledge? We are still at the design input phase for Rebol
> v.3 (open source Apache2 as of 12-Dec-2012!) and Red has been BSD
> since the beginning. So getting input from Forth users would be
> great for us. We're a friendly and thriving community on
> StackOverflow chat, and there's a good vibe to it:
>
> http://rebolsource.net/go/chat-faq
>
> So as the kids on the playground might say: can you and I be
> friends? :-) Or even if we have to stay on separate paths, I'd like
> to know *why*. What's the missing feature that our Forth-inspired
> language didn't take, which is leading to your lack of satisfaction?
> If this isn't the right place or people to ask that question, where
> should I be taking it?

All IMO:

Forth is a very particular language with a very particular design.
Every language is to some extent a compromise, and every successful
language has its own sweet spot. Forth's is that it combines
considerable expressive power with interactivity, extensibility, and,
crucially, simplicity. This simplicity isn't just on the surface, it
goes very deep: it is possible to build tiny (by modern standards)
implementations of Forth, and unlike most other languages, its users
tend to understand its implementation. In that sense, Forth is the
exact opposite of the "high priesthood" of many other languages.
Unlike most languages with interactive interpreters, Forth is used for
real-time control. This has some interesting consequences: for
example, there can be no pauses for garbage collection.

[Of course, there may be complex Forths, or non-real-time Forths, or
whatever; but this is how Forth has been used, and what it was
designed for.)

So, that's Forth: where does Rebol fit in?

Andrew.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 07:02:48 -0500, <hosti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> [snip]

Tell me, just how is it that a supposedly smart EE like you couldn't
manage to keep himself employed at MS? That's the holy grail of
employment, isn't it? If you truly are an EE, your education is
leaps and bounds ahead of a CS. Despite you taking offense over me
using maps with satellite photos to view the registered location of
your IP, a product of the modern era, you still said I should go ahead
and read your resume. That was ironic and contradictory. I guess it
makes sense to sociopaths and mental patients and trolls. And, you
didn't provide a link. Well, I did find an old and partial resume of
someone which might be yours. Same name. Guy worked for MS. It's
clear you valued those experiences you mentioned or you wouldn't have
mentioned them. But, what's available of what could possibly be your
resume indicates you bailed out quickly from MS or were perhaps fired ...
The last thing on this guy's resume was some pseudo-science education
system.

> Look, everyone I've shown this thread to says the mistake I made
> is talking to you--period.

You have some serious comprehension, memory issues, and/or flawed
understanding of basic mores.

Let's review:

1) You didn't talk to me. You responded to Ms. Rather. She was
responding to me. You rudely interjected with an unrelated reply
on another topic. I didn't comment on you being rude initially.
I politely responded with real interest. I like programming
languages. I've looked at many of them, and I've programmed in
many of them. C rules.

2) You insulted me first. You called me rude when I wasn't and then
you vented your wrath upon me for no apparent reason. It was similar
to a random stranger assaulting you in a bar for no reason. Where did
that come from and why? I was attempting to have a polite and serious
conversation. I've stated that honestly at least three times now.
Even so, you insist on taking it the wrong way. You should grow up,
be an adult for once, and apologize for your mistake.

3) You made a mistake in your post. I responded correctly in regards
to your mistake. You said I should read your mind and undestand what
you actually meant. Do you understand how stupid that is? You then
claimed I went on a tirade about executable formats. I was discussing
your post, your claims. You can't rewrite what was written. It was
your mistake that I responded to. Take responsibility for it. Be a man.

> It's only my general desire to answer those who outreach to me
> that leads me to respond.

No one outreached to you. You outreached to us. You did so
inappropriately too.

Ignoring others unless they show interest in your activities in life
is a trait of a sociopath.

> And like I said, you apparently have a lot more interest in me
> than I do in you.

Most people have sympathy, empathy, compassion, and curiosity in regards
to others, whether they like them or not. Saying you don't, means your
a sociopath or psychopath, a hardened criminal, a cold blooded murderer,
or maybe an autistic. All of them have mental problems. I seriously
don't understand how you can make that claim about not caring for people
nd also claim you don't have mental problems. Even stoic, highly
introverted, non-people persons care about others.

> You clearly need help, [...]

I don't need help. I would like an apology.

You started this. You insulted me without cause. Then, you lied
about it. Failure to recognize this indicates it's you who needs
help. How many times do I have to state my position and the recorded
truth before you recognize it as such? Non-comprehension, rejection,
distancing, ... AISI, psychologists would have a "field day"
discussing you.

> [...] and I'm worried that people who need help and to whom the

> world says "ignore" might get lost. See also:
>

> [unrelated link]
>

It seems you have utterly failed to understand exactly where you're
sending your posts. This is NOT a Google Group. It is NOT setup
by Google. Google has no control over the content. This is a Usenet
group. It's hosted on tens of thousands of Usenet servers around
the world. The posts are archived forever. This is also an
unmoderated Usenet forum. There is no one here who is able to
filter or ban people. So, when you act up, as you did, you get to
take the heat for it, depending on the other party, which is me
in this case.

Anyway, in this scenario, you'd be the troll. My belief is that
you actually posted with the intent to incite me. That's why you
responded to Ms. Rather, who was responding to me, instead of
starting a new thread on Rebol, which would've been appropriate.
That's why you're refusing to apologize.

> I don't like that answer to "problem children".

Yes, a "problem child" would be you. Be mature. Accept it. Apologize.
It was your mistake and your insult that started all this.

FYI, denial of reality or distancing from yourself from your actions
is another trait of sociopaths and criminals.

> Yet that's the answer that "reasonable" people tell me I should take.

Who is "reasonable"? Who defines "resonable" for a given situation?

The world is full of assholes and alcoholics. You're clearly in the
asshole category, presently. If it's true that "birds of a feather
flock together", then the "reasonable people" you supposedly consulted
are likely just as biased as you and/or uninformed.

> I like to think I'm the person who is brave enough to test the
> waters a little, at some personal risk--(apparently, given your
> satellite stalking of my parents).

Viewing maps or satellite imagery does not constitute stalking,
nor does knowing your name, nor does knowing your address, birth,
family members, salary, occupation, no more than does looking up
someone's address in the whitepages. The information is readily
available from your IP to *everyone*, and/or provided via Google.
You posted your IP freely, thereby providing a street address. By
doing so, by posting your IP, whether you were informed of it or
not by Google, who had a legal responsibility to tell you they
posted it, you legally gave us - everyone here - permission to use
that information and any or all related legally obtainable
information as I or anyone else here sees fit. Posting your IP is
no different than if you posted a home phone number or home address.
Thank you for granting us the right to use it. I.e., you have
NO legal standing for any veiled threats you make.

The problem here is you're still focusing on the wrong things.
You should be focusing on your own ignorance of posting your IP
to the internet and your security. A smart EE shouldn't do
something so dumb, and do so repeatedly as you've done. What EE
doesn't know how to obscure his IP? It's a mistake to focus on
what I and everyone else is capable of doing with your IP. And,
I politely told you how to *fix* the problem. Of course, a
troll and sociopaths are not concerned with what they should be.

> This has nothing to do with Forth, [...]

That's correct. Nothing at all that you've posted here has
anything to do with Forth. So, just why are you posting here?

> [...] just your mental problems.

I don't have any mental problems that I'm aware of. No one
IRL has ever informed me of any they surmised either. I would
hope that my loved ones would've said something to me directly,
if they believed I was mentally defective. And, I'm fully aware
that if they thought I needed help, they would encourage me to
seek it and/or provide it. You only need two signatures in
most civilized countries to have someone committed to a mental
institution.

So, AFAICT, it's just you projecting your mental issues onto others.
I'm truly surprised no one IRL has ever brought this topic up
with you. Surely, someone in your personal life must've discussed
you being a sociopath. You must've angered many people over the
years with your lack of understanding, empathy, or compassion for
others, your mistreatment of others, your failure to recognize
boundaries both territorial and personal, your intense selfishness
or ruthless pursuits without regards for others, and your inability
to grasp common societal mores, such as not insulting others for
comments made in good faith or intentionally inciting anger, as
you just did.

> If you want to talk to me, fucking grow a pair and call
> me on the phone.

Why would I do that when I can post here for almost nothing?
International phone charges are expensive. Don't you know that?
You claimed that you're an EE. What EE doesn't know about
telephone systems and the internet? With statements like that,
I'd swear that you truly are dumb, and not a *true* EE.


Rod Pemberton

[Albert van der Horst]

In article <op.xb9w0wkl6zenlw@localhost>,
Rod Pemberton <dont_us...@xnothavet.cqm> wrote:
<SNIP>
...

>
>2) You insulted me first. You called me rude when I wasn't and then
>you vented your wrath upon me for no apparent reason. It was similar
>to a random stranger assaulting you in a bar for no reason. Where did
>that come from and why? I was attempting to have a polite and serious
>conversation. I've stated that honestly at least three times now.
>Even so, you insist on taking it the wrong way. You should grow up,
>be an adult for once, and apologize for your mistake.

...

>Most people have sympathy, empathy, compassion, and curiosity in regards
>to others, whether they like them or not. Saying you don't, means your
>a sociopath or psychopath, a hardened criminal, a cold blooded murderer,
>or maybe an autistic. All of them have mental problems. I seriously
>don't understand how you can make that claim about not caring for people
>nd also claim you don't have mental problems. Even stoic, highly
>introverted, non-people persons care about others.
>
>> You clearly need help, [...]
>
>I don't need help. I would like an apology.

...

>Anyway, in this scenario, you'd be the troll. My belief is that
>you actually posted with the intent to incite me. That's why you
>responded to Ms. Rather, who was responding to me, instead of
>starting a new thread on Rebol, which would've been appropriate.
>That's why you're refusing to apologize.
>

..

>
>Yes, a "problem child" would be you. Be mature. Accept it. Apologize.
>It was your mistake and your insult that started all this.
>
>FYI, denial of reality or distancing from yourself from your actions
>is another trait of sociopaths and criminals.

...

>
>The world is full of assholes and alcoholics. You're clearly in the
>asshole category, presently. If it's true that "birds of a feather
>flock together", then the "reasonable people" you supposedly consulted
>are likely just as biased as you and/or uninformed.

...

>I don't have any mental problems that I'm aware of. No one
>IRL has ever informed me of any they surmised either. I would
>hope that my loved ones would've said something to me directly,
>if they believed I was mentally defective. And, I'm fully aware
>that if they thought I needed help, they would encourage me to
>seek it and/or provide it. You only need two signatures in
>most civilized countries to have someone committed to a mental
>institution.
>
>So, AFAICT, it's just you projecting your mental issues onto others.
>I'm truly surprised no one IRL has ever brought this topic up
>with you. Surely, someone in your personal life must've discussed
>you being a sociopath. You must've angered many people over the
>years with your lack of understanding, empathy, or compassion for
>others, your mistreatment of others, your failure to recognize
>boundaries both territorial and personal, your intense selfishness
>or ruthless pursuits without regards for others, and your inability
>to grasp common societal mores, such as not insulting others for
>comments made in good faith or intentionally inciting anger, as
>you just did.

I've had it.

*PLONK*

>Rod Pemberton
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[Rod Pemberton]

On Fri, 07 Mar 2014 02:48:18 -0500, <hughag...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 5, 2014 7:17:13 PM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote:

> I agree that Rod's response, especially the satellite photo of Brian's
> parents' house, was pretty creepy --- [..]

Satellite photos linked to addresses, phone numbers, and IPs are the
modern phonebook and streetmap ... It's only creepy to those who
haven't moved into the modern era of Microsoft Streets and Trips,
Google's satellite maps, and, of course, "Big Brother." Or, it's
creepy for those who haven't accepted or willfully ignore the NSA
and CIA spying, and illegal U.S. government TSA body scans, etc.

You've been told about posting your IP too. Even so, you post from
your relative's IP. Why is that Hugh?

Originally, I intended to do that to you a while ago when you were being
an ass and posting from your relatives house (Uncle?) in California. But,
IIRC, you mentioned something about your relative being seriously ill.
So, I didn't think it would've been taken well by you, not that you
would've
taken it well at any point in time ... But, hitting a guy when he's down,
like when a relative has died or possibly dying, is completely tactless.
But, I'm 100% sure that had I used that on *you* instead of the other guy,
it would've resulted in a far more positive response from those present.
Some here might've even openly applauded the effort as they've done for
attacks on you in the past. So, just remember that you were the one who
inspired such a response originally.

> [...] a new low for comp.lang.forth, which was already holding up
> the bottom for usenet behavior standards.

Lol. Sarcasm? This is from the guy who currently ranks in the top
spot here because he's now the PRIMARY person contributing to "the
bottom ... behavior ... " on c.l.f. I only respond to people who
attack me unprovoked. I don't initiate garbage. Oh, I get it ...
You actually *want* the top spot. Hilarious! Now, you feel or think
you have to do something to outdo me. Good luck. Gentle applause.

> But Albert, you're pretty creepy too!
> Before Rod achieved biggest-creep status on comp.lang.forth, you held
> that dubious distinction:
> [link]
>

I beg to differ. Albert's a nice guy, usually. How could you forget
John Passaniti? I even mentioned him. This flaming toothpick, er...,
hostile fork guy, is his dimwitted clone.

AFAIR, you've *never* complained about Albert before. His recent bout
of PLONKs are annoying, since he PLONKs the incorrect person. You're
supposed to PLONK the person who initiated the conflict. That would
be "hostilefork" a.k.a. Brian Dickens, who was a hostile fork to me
without cause. Maybe, I should've given myself a "cool" moniker first
like "violent knife" or "blunt spoon" before responding to "hostile fork".
The primary person who used PLONK is now deceased. He PLONKed thousands
of new, innocent people posting to comp.lang.c for no reason, R.I.P. For
Albert's sake, I hope the use of PLONK isn't cursed. He suffered before
he passed.

But, it's easy to burst Alfred's bubble. Everyone here noticed when
Jeff Fox and Julian Noble stopped posting. Everyone here would notice
if Ms. Rather or Anton Ertl stopped posting. But, no one noticed
when Bruce McFarland and Rick "rickman" Collins stopped posting, except
me apparently. Almost no one seems to have noticed that Alex McDonald
has almost stopped posting too. So, no one is likely to notice when
Albert van der Horst stops posting also and fades away. Unfortunately,
the same can be said of most others here: Stephen Pelc, Bernd Paysan,
Hans "The Beez" Bezemer, Coos Haak, Marcel Hendrix, Lars Brinkhoff,
Syd Rumpo, Gerry Jackson, Paul Rubin, Paul Bennett, Arthur "Mentifex"
Murray, Julian Fondren, Assad "AKE" or "AKE" Ebrahim, Gavin "Gavino"
Schuett, C.G. Montgomery, Elliott Chapin, Chris Hinsley, Marcos Cruz,
Mark Flamer, ... Most of you are thinking: "Who?". I think it's
possible a few people might notice if Mark Wills or Andrew Haley
just disappeared.

> In this thread you attacked my LC53 prng, which I show here:
>
> [...]
>
> These were not honest mistakes --- you were just trying to make
> my code look like it doesn't work, when it actually does work.
>
> Eventually you admitted that my LC53 does work, due to the fact
> that I "got lucky."

So, Albert attacked you or lied, or maybe he made an honest mistake
due to anger, but where exactly does that make him a creep?

> P.S. for Brian --- I recommend that you don't post your phone number
> on the internet; these creeps are likely to call you up in the middle
> of the night and yell at you.

Hugh, his phone number, if it was actually his, was just bait. He was
trying to get me to call so he could obtain the caller ID or ANI or have
the called traced by the phone company and/or law enforcement. Or, at
least, he was implying that he was doing that, much like he implied
that "reasonable people" were law officers, not his parents, loser bar
friends, or more likely, his imaginary friends and plastic girlfriend.
Or, perhaps the phone number was a joke, e.g., to a mental hospital,
police station, or for one of his enemies. Since it's an unlisted VoIP,
and the customer provided addresses for VoIPs generally aren't real, it
could be for anywhere in the world. Of course, when a phone number is
posted in an open, worldwide forum, he, or whomever the phone number is
actually registered to, could end up with tens of thousands of callers
and phreakers, none of whom are me. I'm not about to step into an idiot's
faulty trap. Phone numbers, just like email addresses, IPs, etc are
harvested from Usenet posts. The fact that he doesn't know this stuff is
truly astounding, if he has masters in electrical engineering as he claims.


Rod Pemberton

[hughag...@yahoo.com]

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 5:36:40 AM UTC-7, hosti...@gmail.com wrote:
> I think all the not-on-the-Tiobe-index languages share a common pain of trying to explain their value. Kids today (and even some adults) don't understand the Catch-22 of "your language isn't popular, so I won't take any time to look at it". (If regardless of merit, how can anything new get popular, if people only look at things that are built on infrastructure that is already popular?)

This is a common problem everywhere, and not just in programming. Banks only lend money for a business if the borrower can show examples of that kind of business being successful already, which results in a lot of look-alike businesses, often next-door to each other.

This is why I was unimpressed by Ayn Rand's "Objectivism" --- an objective comparison only works if the observer already knows what his criteria is. John Galt's engine development would never have gotten financing because he wouldn't have been able to compare it to anything in existence and show that it was better, because it was something completely new. She got around this problem in the book by having him just build the engine in his spare time using spare parts --- but zero-budget development isn't the way that innovations get implemented in the real-world (not even at Testra, although they were pretty close). This is the same objection I have to Gérard Debreu and his general-equilibrium theory, which is ironic because Ayn Rand is considered libertarian and Debreu is considered communist.

This is described in the old joke about how, if Edison had worked under our modern way of thinking, he wouldn't have invented the light-bulb --- he would have invented a bigger candle.

> This inspired me to do some research. I'd like to get an answer to the question of: "For the dedicated members of the Forth community, what needs is Forth meeting that Rebol (today) and Red (tomorrow) can't meet?"

Let me turn around the question: "For the dedicated members of the Forth community, what needs is Forth failing to meet that Forth desperately needs that all modern languages do meet?"

The answer for me is: quotations (the quotation obviously needs to have access to the creator function's local variables). I have abandoned Forth-200x because of their failure to meet this need (and because Payson chose to fake it, rather that face the problem, and I just don't associate with such dishonest people) --- I am writing my own language primarily to meet this one need.

Does Red have quotations or closures or anything similar?

[hosti...@gmail.com]

On Friday, March 7, 2014 5:23:53 PM UTC-5, Rod Pemberton wrote:

> Maybe, I should've given myself a "cool" moniker first
> like "violent knife" or "blunt spoon" before responding to "hostile fork".

Rod, I definitely do owe you an apology. I misread and thought from your response with the IP tracing and photos that you were accusing me of being opaque and hiding, just because my gmail account is a "cool" moniker I use for a website. But you're an earnest person, showing me the painful truth: I'm *not hiding well enough*! Wow, sometimes the truth hurts.

(This is not the only example where I fail at that. I've been known to sometimes go to the bank forgetting to bring my ski mask! This is not entirely my fault, as it's somewhat cultural--I've been discouraged by how people react to me when I do that. The United States people are very backward. Often they will not let you make simple withdrawals from an account, just because you're taking the most basic steps for identity protection!)

But clearly you have a whole supercomputing cluster at your secret lair, with madly impressive anti-spy tech, that gets you on and off Usenet without the NSA ever having an inkling who you really are. We already know you can't possibly be *named* Rod Pemberton...that would be ridiculous, don't make me LAUGH! So I really should call you something else. You suggested "blunt spoon", but I think "dull knife" would capture it a bit better--so if that works for you let's go with it. How about "Dull, K?" for short.

Thinking about you in this new light has me giddy. I bet when you get your morning coffee at Starbucks, you go in wearing a prosthetic face. It's designed for one-time usage, and disposed in an alley before the latte has even started to become cold. Your voice is scrambled during the order by an audio engine that helps you elude identification--while still being comprehensible enough for the barista to hear "venti with soy milk, please". Special detectors in your throat check the coffee for possible toxins as you drink.

Your life must be something out of a Philip K. Dick or William Gibson novel, as you heroically stand for justice to help the uninitiated on... Forth Usenet. So I take back that thing I said--you *are* interesting. The rest of us are just boring dinosaur programmers, chattin' about programming languages. Your guidance is required so that we can live more fruitfully in the real world, where identity must be masked and cycled at all times to avoid tracing.

But dumb as I might be, there's still something very clear. Mr. Dull, you've given away your identity merely with how you talk--in fact there's only one person that intensely clever you COULD possibly be. The secretive invisible mastermind inventor of Bitcoin: the *real* Satoshi Nakamoto!!!

Nice try, genius! But I'm calling Newsweek.

--Brian

P.S. Crap, did I use my name again? Old habits die hard. I meant, uh...

--Strong Bad

[Rod Pemberton]

On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 04:37:09 -0500, <hosti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> [...]you've given away your identity merely with how you talk--in fact

> there's only one person that intensely clever you COULD possibly be.
> The secretive invisible mastermind inventor of Bitcoin: the *real*
> Satoshi Nakamoto!!!
>

It's clear he or someone else created something novel with Bitcoin.
However, Bitcoin is seriously flawed, defective, and therefore doomed.

The man they portrayed, if truly the *real* Satoshi Nakamoto, would
be a kindred spirit, if he's not an autistic or a sociopath. The
article implies he might be a sociopath. It's clear that he recognizes
the truth where others just ignore it. His government paranoias are
justified even without his background.

Bitcoin is doomed not just because of fixable, technical reasons like an
exponentially growing financial ledger/blockchain. If "Satoshi" is truly
as smart as the article implies he is, he should both be able to recognize
the flaws I'm about to mention, or already be aware of them. He should
be willing to come out of retirement to fix them. Call it Bitcoin II.

The lack of reversible transactions means Bitcoins will always
be subject to fraud and theft. The anonymous accounts compounds
the problem. It means Bitcoin will always have people who
accidentally lose their funds or lose access to them. These
unsolved problems create sufficient financial risk that most law
abiding individuals will avoid it. The continuing media coverage
on Bitcoin's major losses and thefts reinforces this belief.

But, the most serious problem with Bitcoin is that it serves NO
purpose for the vast, vast majority of the world's law abiding
citizens. I can use credit or debit just about anywhere, or can use
them to obtain cash for use elsewhere. Those who don't have access
to banking systems won't have access to the internet either. That
means it's of little to no use in developing countries. So,
at best, Bitcoin is a solution in search of a real problem. No one
really needs it except criminals - to bypass legal banking and
launder funds - and Bitcoin miners to make a living. The world's
established banking systems do everything that's needed for most
with minimal cost.

Governments that haven't already outlawed it ... will. Governments
that don't already classified it's use as money laundering ... will.
They're not about to forfit control of the monetary system. The
largest banks are already working at finding better solutions that
won't have any of Bitcoins problems, political, technical, legal,
or perceived risk. So, Bitcoin is fine as an initial proof-of-concept
that an anarchist, crypto-currency which exists and functions. But,
is it the perfect virtual currency for the future? No.


Rod Pemberton

[hughag...@yahoo.com]

On Wednesday, March 5, 2014 7:17:13 PM UTC-7, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article <op.xb9w0wkl6zenlw@localhost>,
> Rod Pemberton <dont_us...@xnothavet.cqm> wrote:
> >> You clearly need help, [...]
>
> >I don't need help. I would like an apology.
> ...

> >I don't have any mental problems that I'm aware of.

> I've had it.
>
> *PLONK*

I agree that Rod's response, especially the satellite photo of Brian's parents' house, was pretty creepy --- a new low for comp.lang.forth, which was already holding up the bottom for usenet behavior standards.

But Albert, you're pretty creepy too! Before Rod achieved biggest-creep status on comp.lang.forth, you held that dubious distinction:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/qqlp1gZnVic

In this thread you attacked my LC53 prng, which I show here:

4294967291 constant rnd-unity
3961633963 constant rnd-mult

macro: <prng> ( rnd -- new-rnd )
rnd-mult um* rnd-unity um/mod drop ;

Note that RND-UNITY = 2^32-5
and RND-MULT = 2^32-333333333

Then you showed this code:
\ Comma for clarity, not a double number.
: LC53 -5 um* -333,333,333 + nip ;
This is not my LC53 however --- you were lying.

Caught in that lie, you tried again, stating that my RND-MULT is 333,333,333 (you subtly removed the negative sign).

These were not honest mistakes --- you were just trying to make my code look like it doesn't work, when it actually does work.

Eventually you admitted that my LC53 does work, due to the fact that I "got lucky."

*PLONK*

P.S. for Brian --- I recommend that you don't post your phone number on the internet; these creeps are likely to call you up in the middle of the night and yell at you. I have downloaded your language and will delve into it. Pretty much everything I know about programming (quotations, etc.) I learned from non-Forth languages, so hopefully I will learn new ideas from Red too.