Dropbox rant

[Mark Wills]

<rant>
How, in the name of all that is holy, can Dropbox.exe
need 98,540 *KILOBYTES* of RAM to do its thing?

It's not much more than a glorified FTP Client/Server.

FFS.
</rant>

[Cecil Bayona]

That is an illustration of why Forth is not popular, there is absolutely
no interest or even knowledge of what being efficient is.

Forth is a tool set for those who want to efficiently use the machine
resources, most programmers today have no idea of the concept, megabytes
upon megabytes to do the simplest task.

My favorite Forth for a very long time was Pygmy Forth, 19Kb, with
Interpreter, Compiler, De-compiler, Assembler, Disassembler, Meta
Compiler, and an editor.

--
Cecil - k5nwa

[Andrew Haley]

Cecil Bayona <cba...@cbayona.com> wrote:
> On 4/22/2017 1:24 PM, Mark Wills wrote:
>> <rant>
>> How, in the name of all that is holy, can Dropbox.exe
>> need 98,540 *KILOBYTES* of RAM to do its thing?
>>
>> It's not much more than a glorified FTP Client/Server.
>>
>> FFS.
>> </rant>
>
> That is an illustration of why Forth is not popular, there is absolutely
> no interest or even knowledge of what being efficient is.

The times they are a changin'. If you run servers in the cloud you
pay for processors and you pay for bytes, so there is a considerable
renewed interest in fast and compact systems and protocols.

Andrew.

[Julian Fondren]

On Sunday, April 23, 2017 at 4:50:31 AM UTC-5, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> The times they are a changin'. If you run servers in the cloud you
> pay for processors and you pay for bytes, so there is a considerable
> renewed interest in fast and compact systems and protocols.
>
> Andrew.

I have a little script in Perl that continuously makes HTTP requests.
It's actual function is to serialize internal requests to an
application that tends to fall over if it gets asked 20 expensive
questions at once. The script itself doesn't actually accept
HTTP requests. It's one half of the solution. The other half is a CGI
script that either says "oh yeah here's your (cached) answer
immediately" or "you want what? never heard of it. enjoy your error.
(psst-- they want this new thing now. I've added it to the list!)"

This little script grows by ONE MEGABYTE each request. Permanently. I
have no idea why. I tried switching out LWP, I tried not checking for
the JSON-validity of the data it was fetching. The only other thing
the script does is log! In the end I resolved things well enough (that
I can't now justify spending any more time on the matter) by having it
kill itself after it bloats past 200MB.

This was a server with 8GB of memory. This was in 2017. This was with
a relatively nice high level language. And the entire time I was
trying to find out what was going on, I was thinking, maaan, if only
this were in Forth...

In Forth I would've tested the JSON with a streaming validator working
in fixed memory, writing to a file as fast as I got more JSON from the
remote server. It's inconceivable that I'd find myself worrying about
a similar Forth program taking 7.1G of RAM, or that I'd have any
trouble pinning down where that came from.

[foxaudio...@gmail.com]

What would you say has prevented Forth from being applied to this problem
domain?

My own prejudiced opinion is that a raw Forth solution would be in-
comprehensible to the majority of IT people, but some kind of application
specific language tailored to the problem could be made palatable I suspect and
also be efficient.

However most Forth professionals are busy solving a completely different set of
problems, so perhaps there is just not the critical mass of Forth people to
to get activity in these other areas. (?)

B

[Julian Fondren]

On Monday, April 24, 2017 at 8:06:07 PM UTC-5, foxaudio...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> What would you say has prevented Forth from being applied to this problem
> domain?
>

What prevented me from applying Forth in this exact instance was
simply that the tools didn't exist, and that I couldn't justifiably
write them instead of use tools that did exist.

The tools aren't much:
1. make HTTP requests over TLS
2. validate JSON

JSON can validated one character at a time with a state machine.

HTTP requests are trivial, but I don't know anything about TLS;
you could probably use libcurl.

> My own prejudiced opinion is that a raw Forth solution would be in-
> comprehensible to the majority of IT people, but some kind of application
> specific language tailored to the problem could be made palatable I suspect and
> also be efficient.

Replace one thing nobody has any skill in with another thing that
nobody has any skill in? The result still loses to what people already
have skill in. Just focus on making a good 'raw Forth solution'.
Usually that involves a measure of 'application specific language'.

> However most Forth professionals are busy solving a completely different set of
> problems, so perhaps there is just not the critical mass of Forth people to
> to get activity in these other areas. (?)

This kind of talk is why I provided a specific answer your general
question above. If the problem is "tools don't exist", you can just
create them.

[foxaudio...@gmail.com]

On Monday, April 24, 2017 at 11:30:22 PM UTC-4, Julian Fondren wrote:
>
> This kind of talk is why I provided a specific answer your general
> question above. If the problem is "tools don't exist", you can just
> create them.

I am not sure what "this kind of talk" means exactly Julian. I was not being
antagonistic.

"Just create them" is a common Forth mantra, but your case demonstrates that
time is finite and we can't do everything. I was wondering why, if it can be
better in Forth, have the Forth programmers of the world not picked up the
challenge. I submitted that they are busy doing other kinds of work.

My implication is that one would create an intermediate word set on top of
Forth that would let others work in the problem space with less mental
friction. The word names chosen would be familiar to web developer for example.
Then the Forth based solution would accessible to the people in the field
and maybe even preferred because of the benefits.

Where my thoughts come from:

Without a critical mass of the world using Forth solutions we are back to the limitations of lifespan for the small group of Forth coders who exist.

It limits how deep Forth and the Forth philosophy can get into the bigger world.

The observation that I see are the big revolutions in computing in the last 20
years (internet, mobile phones) but the world seems to have forgotten Forth or
if they know about it, the benefits that we perceive have not been communicated.

Perhaps it is not possible.
It could be that it's just to hard for people to change their paradigms.

Just things that I think about.

B

[Elizabeth D. Rather]

The fact that no of the organizations that were using Forth were working
in this problem domain, and the organizations that were working on it
didn't know about Forth.

> My own prejudiced opinion is that a raw Forth solution would be in-
> comprehensible to the majority of IT people, but some kind of application
> specific language tailored to the problem could be made palatable I suspect and
> also be efficient.

The whole methodology of working with Forth is based on developing an
application-oriented language for the domain in question.

> However most Forth professionals are busy solving a completely different set of
> problems, so perhaps there is just not the critical mass of Forth people to
> to get activity in these other areas. (?)

It's not so much a problem of finding a "critical mass of Forth people"
to work on a particular application domain, it's a matter of finding a
funding source for it. Programmers, like other people, expect to eat
dinner every day. Chuck's early work was funded by NRAO. He worked on
the applications they paid him to do. When he and I founded FORTH, Inc.,
we made a living writing the applications our customers wanted.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

--
Elizabeth D. Rather
FORTH, Inc.
6080 Center Drive, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90045
USA

[Elizabeth D. Rather]

On 4/24/17 7:02 PM, foxaudio...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 24, 2017 at 11:30:22 PM UTC-4, Julian Fondren wrote:
>>
>> This kind of talk is why I provided a specific answer your general
>> question above. If the problem is "tools don't exist", you can just
>> create them.
>
> I am not sure what "this kind of talk" means exactly Julian. I was not being
> antagonistic.
>
> "Just create them" is a common Forth mantra, but your case demonstrates that
> time is finite and we can't do everything. I was wondering why, if it can be
> better in Forth, have the Forth programmers of the world not picked up the
> challenge. I submitted that they are busy doing other kinds of work.

Forth programmers don't "just create" tools on spec. Any Forth
programmer working in a particular application domain develops the tools
needed, and they remain in his/her toolbox. The interesting thing is,
that I have seen good Forth programmers tackle brand new application
domains, and they will develop the needed intermediate tools and
complete the application in less time than professional C programmers
have estimated, even with whatever tools they had handy.

> My implication is that one would create an intermediate word set on top of
> Forth that would let others work in the problem space with less mental
> friction. The word names chosen would be familiar to web developer for example.
> Then the Forth based solution would accessible to the people in the field
> and maybe even preferred because of the benefits.

Yes, that is the process we all use. But those word sets would spread
if, and only if, that code was documented and published for others
working in that domain. This is where the model breaks down: the
organization funding the original work either deliberately decides to
keep the code proprietary to maintain their competitive edge, or is
reluctant to spend the additional funds to put the code into publishable
form.

A lot of the libraries in C and other languages are developed either in
academia, where publishing is expected and supported, or by individual
programmers on their own time. Academia in general has not embraced
Forth (see below). The latter case tends not to happen because those
individual programmers would rather implement a new Forth than develop,
document, and publish application oriented tools.

> Where my thoughts come from:
>
> Without a critical mass of the world using Forth solutions we are back to the limitations of lifespan for the small group of Forth coders who exist.

Each one of you needs to be developing and cherishing newbies by showing
them how to use the Forth tools you have developed.

> It limits how deep Forth and the Forth philosophy can get into the bigger world.

Yes.

> The observation that I see are the big revolutions in computing in the last 20
> years (internet, mobile phones) but the world seems to have forgotten Forth or
> if they know about it, the benefits that we perceive have not been communicated.
>
> Perhaps it is not possible.
> It could be that it's just to hard for people to change their paradigms.

People follow the paradigms they learn in college. Back in the day, we
tried very hard to interest universities in Forth. Some engineering
depts loved it, because of the productivity, but gave it up because
their students couldn't get Forth jobs when they graduated. Computer
science depts hated Forth, because it was too simple.

> Just things that I think about.

As do I.

[john]

In article <mJOdnfVoXsSSZ2PF...@supernews.com>,
era...@forth.com says...

> It's not so much a problem of finding a "critical mass of Forth people"
> to work on a particular application domain, it's a matter of finding a
> funding source for it. Programmers, like other people, expect to eat
> dinner every day. Chuck's early work was funded by NRAO. He worked on
> the applications they paid him to do. When he and I founded FORTH, Inc.,
> we made a living writing the applications our customers wanted.
>
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth
>
>

A common mistake Elizabeth.

Take a look at free pascal,/lazarus or any number of other
projects.

I'm doing my thing - it may come to nothing but there's
no third party paying me (sad but that's life)

All it takes is a few competent people to put their minds to finishing
a project. Gravity sets in once something of worth is
demonstrated. Until then keep your head down and get on with it.

There's enough people here that do nothing but gossip like
12 year old girls every day. (and probably a few robots - or robotic people)

But when anyone can say that anything they do is "Forth" all you
will ever get is chaos.

Forth doesn't need a cute little logo - it needs an enforced trademark.
And if it isn't compliant with the official standard it doesn't get to call
itself Forth.

--

john

=========================
http://johntech.co.uk

"Bleeding Edge Forum"
http://johntech.co.uk/forum/

=========================

[lehs]

In the 80's there was a lot of entusiasm in Forth community.
Then a dark gray curtain was closed - all that was counted was business.
And finally Fourth Dimension consequently was let down.

I do think this development is unique for Forth. In other communities
there are no contradictions between amateurs and professionals .
Of course, a lot of programmers want to spoil their hobby by making
it to a profession, but that doesn't damage the society in other ways
that the competition makes them greedy minded - which really must
be an obstacle for creativity.

As said, some computer scientist despise Forth for it's simplicity and
invent new fascilities and error-possibilities all the time. Of cource every
kind of application can be made in Forth, but to prepare for that relatively
few programmers must develop the intermediate software that constantly
is developed by millions of people in the industry.

In time Forth-like ideas may become the industrial standard but it's not
much anybody can do to influent - except by using Forth.

A mascot may have just as much influence as anybody though, even without
being able to write a single program. Asmarketting people is well aware of.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, April 25, 2017 at 2:23:15 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> In article <mJOdnfVoXsSSZ2PF...@supernews.com>,
> era...@forth.com says...
> > It's not so much a problem of finding a "critical mass of Forth people"
> > to work on a particular application domain, it's a matter of finding a
> > funding source for it. Programmers, like other people, expect to eat
> > dinner every day. Chuck's early work was funded by NRAO. He worked on
> > the applications they paid him to do. When he and I founded FORTH, Inc.,
> > we made a living writing the applications our customers wanted.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Elizabeth
>
> A common mistake Elizabeth.
>
> Take a look at free pascal,/lazarus or any number of other
> projects.
>
> I'm doing my thing - it may come to nothing but there's
> no third party paying me (sad but that's life)
>
> All it takes is a few competent people to put their minds to finishing
> a project. Gravity sets in once something of worth is
> demonstrated. Until then keep your head down and get on with it.

I got paid to write MFX --- there was a lot of work involved --- I wouldn't have written that for free (and I'm not enthusiastic about writing Straight Forth for free now).

> But when anyone can say that anything they do is "Forth" all you
> will ever get is chaos.

MFX was not ANS-Forth compliant --- and it was only loosely compliant with Forth-83 (I had not, at that time, actually read the Forth-83 document) --- does this mean that I don't get to call it a "Forth" cross-compiler?

MFX did not result in chaos though --- MFX continues to be used today on the RACE processor, which is used in all of the motion-control boards sold by Testra --- how many motion-control boards has Forth Inc. built and sold? The only thing that Forth Inc. sells is hot air and blue sky, which seems to me to be closer to chaos than a functioning motion-control board.

> Forth doesn't need a cute little logo - it needs an enforced trademark.
> And if it isn't compliant with the official standard it doesn't get to call
> itself Forth.

How will you enforce this? If I say that MFX is "Forth" you will apparently hit me with a big lawsuit (similar to how Elizabeth Rather tried to hit Apple Computer with a big lawsuit because they were using the name "Swift" for their language) --- or, more likely, you will just flame me on the internet.

I say that my novice-package is Forth, and that it is fully ANS-Forth compliant, but all of Elizabeth Rather's sycophants say that it contradicts the "Forth Way" and hence I don't get to call it Forth. It seems obvious to me that if you allow the Forth Inc. marketing department (Elizabeth Rather) to decide what is "Forth" and what is not, then only Forth Inc. products will be "Forth" and everything else will be a non-standard wanna-bee.

Alex McDonald has spent almost 4 years now saying that I have a "serious misunderstanding of how pointers work" because my array sort and my array definer allows arrays of structs --- I haven't yet rewritten my array sort and my array definer to be restricted to only supporting arrays of cells --- so apparently the endless flaming doesn't work as well as hoped.

[Julian Fondren]

On Tuesday, April 25, 2017 at 12:02:40 AM UTC-5, foxaudio...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 24, 2017 at 11:30:22 PM UTC-4, Julian Fondren wrote:
> >
> > This kind of talk is why I provided a specific answer your general
> > question above. If the problem is "tools don't exist", you can just
> > create them.
>
> I am not sure what "this kind of talk" means exactly

You drive through one neighborhood and are pleased to see that it's
very clean and pretty. You keep driving and then enter a neighborhood
where there's litter everywhere, used diapers by the streetside,
graffiti on street signs and building signs, etc.

If you wonder at the difference, there are immediately two kinds of
questions you can ask: "why don't the people in this second
neighborhood keep it clean?" and "what is wrong with the various
fundamental constants of the universe (planck, etc.), the nature of
humanity, the family structure, post-hunter-gatherer civilization,
Western legal traditions, global climate trends, preschool
education, and the GDP - that result in the cleanliness privilege
some neighborhoods and the cleanliness deprivation of others?"

The first question regards a specific population in a specific
circumstance, and their specific skills and agency (not littering;
cleaning up litter). It can at least potentially be directly answered
by the people involved: each individual who produces some of the mess
or fails to clean it up can explain themselves. If you wanted to
improve things it's obvious how you should proceed: discourage people
from littering, encourage people to pick up litter, and actually clean
things up yourself. Even if advocacy is not one of your skills, you
can still directly contribute to the cleanliness of the neighborhood.

The second question is fun to try and answer. And maybe you'll come up
with a really plausible-sounding reason as to why the phase of the
moon uniquely affects this one neighborhood and not the other. But no
matter how plausible-sounding the reason (lets not pretend that truth
is an option here), it won't be one that you can do anything about.
You can't directly contribute to the correction of the moon, and no
matter how sweetly you advocate that the moon be corrected, who is
going to listen to you who can directly contribute to fixing it? The
entire discussion is only good for passing the time.

There's the drunkard's search:

A policeman sees a drunk man searching for something under a
streetlight and asks what the drunk has lost. He says he lost his
keys and they both look under the streetlight together. After a few
minutes the policeman asks if he is sure he lost them here, and the
drunk replies, no, and that he lost them in the park. The policeman
asks why he is searching here, and the drunk replies, "this is where
the light is."

And there's the intellectual's search, where you make sure to look
for your keys only where they would be irretrievable if found.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

I see some posts from Julien Fondren in which he is making death threats against people, and other posts in which he is just spewing nonsense --- I prefer the latter --- either way though, he makes the ANS-Forth cult look foolish, because they embrace anybody who is loyal, including mentally-ill metaphor-stretching clowns such as himself.

[Alex]

On 4/25/2017 19:25, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> (and I'm not enthusiastic about
> writing Straight Forth for free now).

Start paying yourself, make yourself indispensable and then -- kaboom --
ask for a raise.

>
> Alex McDonald has spent almost 4 years now saying that I have a
> "serious misunderstanding of how pointers work" because my array sort

> and my array definer allows arrays of structs --- *I haven't yet

> rewritten my array sort and my array definer to be restricted to only

> supporting arrays of cells* --- so apparently the endless flaming

> doesn't work as well as hoped.
>

There you go again. Seriously misunderstanding.

--
Alex

[Ron Aaron]

On 26/04/2017 17:57, Alex wrote:
> On 4/25/2017 19:25, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> (and I'm not enthusiastic about
>> writing Straight Forth for free now).
>
> Start paying yourself, make yourself indispensable and then -- kaboom --
> ask for a raise.

Hey! That's my business model!

>> Alex McDonald has spent almost 4 years now saying that I have a
>> "serious misunderstanding of how pointers work" because my array sort
>> and my array definer allows arrays of structs --- *I haven't yet
>> rewritten my array sort and my array definer to be restricted to only
>> supporting arrays of cells* --- so apparently the endless flaming
>> doesn't work as well as hoped.
>>
>
> There you go again. Seriously misunderstanding.

Not so! He understands something other than what you've said, that's all.

[Alex]

I just had a Marx party of the third party moment there.

--
Alex

[Ron Aaron]

With a sanity clause?

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 8:41:44 AM UTC-7, Ron Aaron wrote:
> On 26/04/2017 17:57, Alex wrote:
> > On 4/25/2017 19:25, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> (and I'm not enthusiastic about
> >> writing Straight Forth for free now).
> >
> > Start paying yourself, make yourself indispensable and then -- kaboom --
> > ask for a raise.
>
> Hey! That's my business model!

Your business model is to live off of American foreign-aid money.

Your strategy with critics is to burn them alive with white-phosphorus.

> >> Alex McDonald has spent almost 4 years now saying that I have a
> >> "serious misunderstanding of how pointers work" because my array sort
> >> and my array definer allows arrays of structs --- *I haven't yet
> >> rewritten my array sort and my array definer to be restricted to only
> >> supporting arrays of cells* --- so apparently the endless flaming
> >> doesn't work as well as hoped.
> >>
> >
> > There you go again. Seriously misunderstanding.
>
> Not so! He understands something other than what you've said, that's all.

Alex McDonald has been saying for almost four years that I don't know that it is possible to have an array of pointers to structs. Everybody understands this though --- it is taught in high-school.

The ANS-Forth cult's strategy with critics is to present a false dichotomy of themselves as total experts on Forth and the critics as being utterly ignorant of even the most basic concepts of programming.

[rickman]

Everybody knows there is no sanity clause. (an omage to the Marx Bros)

--

Rick C

[Ron Aaron]

On 26/04/2017 22:42, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 8:41:44 AM UTC-7, Ron Aaron wrote:
>> On 26/04/2017 17:57, Alex wrote:
>>> On 4/25/2017 19:25, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> (and I'm not enthusiastic about
>>>> writing Straight Forth for free now).
>>>
>>> Start paying yourself, make yourself indispensable and then -- kaboom --
>>> ask for a raise.
>>
>> Hey! That's my business model!
>
> Your business model is to live off of American foreign-aid money.
>
> Your strategy with critics is to burn them alive with white-phosphorus.

You're a fuckin' loony cunt, you know that?

Please get some psychiatric help before you hurt someone. It's no
wonder "Straight Forth" hasn't seen the light of day yet, 5 or more
years on; it only exists in your paranoid delusional mind.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

There is a pattern here:

1.) Elizabeth Rather claims to be the "leading expert" of Forth, which implies that all other Forthers are inferior --- I find this offensive.

2.) The Israelis claim to be the "Chosen People of God," which implies that all other people are despised by God --- I find this offensive.

Both ANS-Forth and Judaism are cults --- in both cases they claim to be the standard for the entire world, and say that everybody else is a non-standard wanna-bee --- in both cases they quickly descend into flinging gross insults ("fuckin' loony cunt") at anybody who doubts their supposed superiority.

[Ron Aaron]

On 27/04/2017 7:20, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> There is a pattern here:

Yes: you continue to make irrational ad-hominem attacks against everyone
who even slightly disagrees with you. It's your peculiar psychosis.

> 2.) The Israelis claim to be the "Chosen People of God," which implies that all other people are despised by God --- I find this offensive.

No, Israelis don't make that claim. So you're taking offense
unnecessarily; not that that will stop you.

Point of information: nobody gives a rat's ass what you find offensive,
in particular since you delight in being offensive to others.

> Both ANS-Forth and Judaism are cults --- in both cases they claim to be the standard for the entire world, and say that everybody else is a non-standard wanna-bee --- in both cases they quickly descend into flinging gross insults ("fuckin' loony cunt") at anybody who doubts their supposed superiority.

Not even close.

In the case of "Israelis", you're conflating "Israeli" and "Jewish". Of
course you are probably not aware, since you don't ever bother
researching anything, that 20% of Israeli citizens are not Jewish at all
(they're Christians and Moslems and Druze and some other religions
you've never heard of). Of the remaining 80%, the majority is not
"religious". So "Israeli" != "Jewish". That's just to begin with.

In the specific case of "Judaism", you're also wrong. But answering
your paranoid delusions is pointless, so I encourage you to just look up
(from actual Jewish sources) what "Judaism" believes regarding non-Jews.
You may be surprised.

Of course, all this is ridiculously off-topic for CLF. As usual.

[rickman]

I think you must be abusing Hugh. When I converse with him he simply
says I am a terrible person and that I attack him so he tries to put me
in my place. But you seem to bring out the truly evil side of him.
Have you been practicing?

--

Rick C

[Ron Aaron]

On 04/27/17 08:31, rickman wrote:

> I think you must be abusing Hugh. When I converse with him he simply
> says I am a terrible person and that I attack him so he tries to put me
> in my place. But you seem to bring out the truly evil side of him. Have
> you been practicing?

Not much practice needed, I'm afraid. Hugh's got a hard-on for certain
topics. FORTH, Inc. for one; Israel or Jews for another; homosexuality
for yet another. He has a compulsive need to "come out on top" at all
times (I'll leave others to speculate on why that may be so).

So when someone disagrees with him in any way, he flings at them
whatever excreta his mind latches onto as being the most damaging to
that person.

In my case, his rabid hatred of Israelis and/or Jews is what boils over.
In other's cases, his hatred of FORTH, Inc. is what compels him to
label (just about everyone active in this newsgroup) as a "toady of Ms.
Rather". <shrug>

So while he does occasionally make interesting technical statements or
contributions, his rather egregious antisocial behavior makes him a
target for those of us who have listened to his incessant screeds over
the years.

I apologize to the sane population of CLF, but sometimes I have an
overpowering urge to kick him in the nards.

[rickman]

Yeah, I know what you mean. I don't especially enjoy abusing the
mentally ill, but often he gives an appearance of not being so mentally
ill and I respond. I guess I should just resist and ignore him as I
encourage others to do. Easier to say than do, I guess...

There are times I regret his insanity. I wouldn't mind discussing his
Forth CPU ideas, but likely they are a bit grandiose for efficient
implementation. He thinks in software terms which often will result in
poor hardware. It can be hard to come up with an approach which works
well for both hardware and software.

--

Rick C

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 10:43:41 PM UTC-7, Ron Aaron wrote:
> I apologize to the sane population of CLF, but sometimes I have an
> overpowering urge to kick him in the nards.

[rickman]

Physician heal thyself!

--

Rick C

[Ron Aaron]

Thanks!

I never thought you would exhibit a sense of humor. Live and learn!

[Ron Aaron]

Just a followup to a previous statement I made: I was wrong.

The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics just released a demographics
report (as they do every year, prior to Israel Independence Day).

As of this latest report, the non-Jewish population is about 25%, not
20% as I had said.

Among the Jewish population, only 44% identify as "secular or
non-religious", which surprises me -- it's always been more than 50%
(and in the past, considerably more).

Among the non-Jewish population, a mere 21% identify as
secular/non-religious.

Still off-topic for the group, though...

[HAA]

Ron Aaron wrote:
> Just a followup to a previous statement I made: I was wrong.
>
> The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics just released a demographics
> report (as they do every year, prior to Israel Independence Day).
>
> As of this latest report, the non-Jewish population is about 25%, not
> 20% as I had said.
>
> Among the Jewish population, only 44% identify as "secular or
> non-religious", which surprises me -- it's always been more than 50%
> (and in the past, considerably more).

I'd say what's being reported is the willingness or otherwise of citizens to
publicly express a position, and that's going to be influenced by external
factors. A 'secular or non-religious' doesn't suddenly 'get religion'.

> ...

> Still off-topic for the group, though...

Easily remedied e.g. 'What attracted you to Forth - circumstance or disposition?' :)

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, April 29, 2017 at 6:10:10 PM UTC-7, HAA wrote:
> Ron Aaron wrote:
> > Just a followup to a previous statement I made: I was wrong.
> >
> > The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics just released a demographics
> > report (as they do every year, prior to Israel Independence Day).
> >
> > As of this latest report, the non-Jewish population is about 25%, not
> > 20% as I had said.

This is why the Israeli government routinely kills the non-Jewish population with anti-personnel weapons (including the white-phosphorous I mentioned earlier) --- the purpose is to keep the non-Jewish population down so they can never swing an election --- faking up a democracy only works well when one tribe controls 80% or more of the population --- it also only works well when that tribe gets billions of dollars in foreign-aid, plus weapons worth many billions more, plus gets a blind eye turned toward them when they break the Geneva Convention routinely.

> > Among the Jewish population, only 44% identify as "secular or
> > non-religious", which surprises me -- it's always been more than 50%
> > (and in the past, considerably more).
>
> I'd say what's being reported is the willingness or otherwise of citizens to
> publicly express a position, and that's going to be influenced by external
> factors. A 'secular or non-religious' doesn't suddenly 'get religion'.

Immigrants have to prove that they are Jewish by learning Hebrew, or they aren't allowed into Israel. Then the citizens who have been there all their lives, especially those whose parents were also natives, complain that the immigrants are just faking it to get the foreign-aid money and free land. There is a lot of strife among the Israelis to prove that they are Jewish enough to deserve the foreign-aid money and free land.

Any Israeli who doesn't claim to be enthusiastically Jewish is skating on thin ice. When it comes time to dole out the foreign-aid money and free land, the secular Israelis are going to find themselves at the bottom of the list, with the more enthusiastically Jewish Israelis above them on the list. The worst-case scenario for the secular Israeli would be getting kicked out of the country. Foreign-aid money is unlimited, but land does have limits --- not every Israeli can get free land and a free house --- some will be denied, and they will be the secular ones.

Ron Aaron is a fool! He makes blatantly secular statements on a public forum:

On Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 9:45:06 PM UTC-7, Ron Aaron wrote:
> On 27/04/2017 7:20, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The Israelis claim to be the "Chosen People of God," which implies that all other people are despised by God --- I find this offensive.
>
> No, Israelis don't make that claim. So you're taking offense
> unnecessarily; not that that will stop you.

WTF??? Making that claim is the fundamental principle of Israel --- this is why Israel gets billions upon billions of dollars in foreign-aid money, unlimited weaponry, and free land --- because they have buffaloed idiot American Christians who focus too much on the Old Testament and have acquired an inferiority complex as a result (Bible-thumpers are known for being dumb, and Old Testament enthusiasts are dumber than dumb).

When it comes time to dole out the foreign-aid money and free land, is Ron Aaron going to be at the top of the list? No! That dumb-ass just bought himself a ticket to the bottom of the list. Ron Aaron should have at least made a half-ass effort at faking some Jewishness --- the smart thing to do is promote Israel as the "Chosen People of God" when he is on public forums --- he can admit that Chosenness is all horseshit in private among his fellow atheists, but not in public if he has any brains at all under his beanie cap.

Ron Aaron is also a fool because he says to me:

"Please get some psychiatric help before you hurt someone."

This is despite the fact that I have never threatened anybody on comp.lang.forth or any other internet forum.
Then he says this:
"I apologize to the sane population of CLF, but sometimes I have an overpowering urge to kick [Hugh] in the nards."
This is not the first time that he has made threats of physical violence on comp.lang.forth either.
Ron Aaron is making a complete fool out of himself --- he is obviously mentally ill, or stupid, or both.

[Ron Aaron]

On 04/30/17 07:52, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> This is why the Israeli government routinely kills the non-Jewish population with anti-personnel weapons (including the white-phosphorous I mentioned earlier) --- the purpose is to keep the non-Jewish population down so they can never swing an election --- faking up a democracy only works well when one tribe controls 80% or more of the population --- it also only works well when that tribe gets billions of dollars in foreign-aid, plus weapons worth many billions more, plus gets a blind eye turned toward them when they break the Geneva Convention routinely.

Hugh, Hugh! You make my task far too easy. Wait... I have to check on
my store of white-phosphorous, I think I'm running low. (cue Hugh
calling me out for my "disgusting insensitivity", blah, blah blah)

> Immigrants have to prove that they are Jewish by learning Hebrew, or they aren't allowed into Israel

So... are all the Arab Israelis who know Hebrew also Jewish? Are the
Jewish Israelis who know Arabic, Muslims? I'm confused now. Perhaps you
can elucidate. For anyone with a shred of interest in the facts:
knowledge of Hebrew is neither a requirement for entering Israel, nor
for gaining citizenship. I know quite a few people who are citizens,
and can't speak Hebrew. Including some who were born here.

> Any Israeli who doesn't claim to be enthusiastically Jewish is skating on thin ice.

I didn't know there were so many ice-rinks in Tel-Aviv! Really, please
do share more of your deep knowledge of Israel!

>... not every Israeli can get free land and a free house --- some will be denied, and they will be the secular ones.

Wait, what? The damned bank claims I owe them a lot of money on my
"mortgage". WTF? I'm supposed to have a free house and free land!?!?
Thanks for letting me know, Hugh!
Again, for anyone who is interested: nobody gets a "free house". The
government actually owns all the land, and "homeowners" get a 99-year
lease of the land when they purchase a house (or farm or whatever).

And BTW, I'm not one of "the secular ones", but whatevs...

> Ron Aaron is a fool! He makes blatantly secular statements on a public forum:

Yes! The "shabak" is going to haul me in for reprogramming, any day
now. My main foolishness (on this forum, anyway), is in continuing to
barb you. I should let the rabid dog lay (and lie, as you simply cannot
avoid doing). But. I. Just. Can't. Control. Myself.

> WTF??? Making that claim is the fundamental principle of Israel

No, it isn't.

> When it comes time to dole out the foreign-aid money and free land, is Ron Aaron going to be at the top of the list? No! That dumb-ass just bought himself a ticket to the bottom of the list. Ron Aaron should have at least made a half-ass effort at faking some Jewishness --- the smart thing to do is promote Israel as the "Chosen People of God" when he is on public forums --- he can admit that Chosenness is all horseshit in private among his fellow atheists, but not in public if he has any brains at all under his beanie cap.

Damn! Now you tell me!

What is this "free land" of which you speak? Can you please point me at
the appropriate governmental agency to which I need apply? My bank
account is awfully meager, I could really use the help. Thanks!

> Ron Aaron is also a fool because he says to me:
> "Please get some psychiatric help before you hurt someone."
> This is despite the fact that I have never threatened anybody on comp.lang.forth or any other internet forum.

You've bragged in public fora about carrying a concealed and unlicensed
weapon. Interested parties can look that up. Your unstable mental
condition is obvious to anyone who reads your writing. QED.

> Then he says this:
> "I apologize to the sane population of CLF, but sometimes I have an overpowering urge to kick [Hugh] in the nards."
> This is not the first time that he has made threats of physical violence on comp.lang.forth either.
> Ron Aaron is making a complete fool out of himself --- he is obviously mentally ill, or stupid, or both.

Quite likely.

What's the weather like in Hugh's Fantasyland?

[Ron Aaron]

On 04/30/17 04:09, HAA wrote:
> Ron Aaron wrote:

>> Among the Jewish population, only 44% identify as "secular or
>> non-religious", which surprises me -- it's always been more than 50%
>> (and in the past, considerably more).

> I'd say what's being reported is the willingness or otherwise of citizens to
> publicly express a position, and that's going to be influenced by external
> factors. A 'secular or non-religious' doesn't suddenly 'get religion'.

Maybe, but it's the same polling body with the same polling methodology.
Not that it matters too much: as you say, people may answer what they
feel is safe to answer.

>> Still off-topic for the group, though...
>
> Easily remedied e.g. 'What attracted you to Forth - circumstance or disposition?' :)

:)

I'm not sure that binary choice is really it. Something of a
combination, I would say.

I first got interested in Forth when I was looking for a small
interpreter to insert into a project. I did a lot of research, and
found that Forth was (at the time, anyway) about as small an interpreter
as I could get away with and have the functionality I needed. This was
for an employer's product, "back in the day".

Having been intrigued by Forth and finding it useful, I messed around
with Win32Forth and some others. Then I stumbled upon RetroForth.

At that point, I decided I wanted a small and fast Forth, so I asked C.
Childers (the RetroForth author) if I could fork his assembly version of
RF. He said I could take it over altogether, and so the very first
version of "Reva Forth" was born. Reva quickly diverged from RF, but
they continued to borrow from each other for a while.

That was an interesting project. I got to work in ASM and Forth, which
satisfied my low-level disposition. But circumstances overtook me, and
Reva lay fallow (from my perspective, anyway; others have apparently
forked or derived from it).

Some time later, I wanted a cross-platform language for a crypto-based
project. I had some stringent security concerns, and wasn't happy with
any of the alternatives. Remembering the fun I had with Reva, I took
some of its ideas (and none of its code) to make 8th.

To answer the question: for me, it's both :)

[rickman]

On 4/30/2017 1:24 AM, Ron Aaron wrote:
>
> What's the weather like in Hugh's Fantasyland?

Can I ask your purpose in discussing this with Hugh? This is one of his
hot button issues and I don't see how you can have any impact on the way
he thinks. Is that what you are expecting? Or are you just so shocked
that anyone could be so dilusional?

--

Rick C

[Ron Aaron]

I'm old enough that I'm no longer shocked by any delusional thing anyone
may happen to say.

I mainly respond to Hugh because I enjoy poking him while I'm bored
between compiles. He always rises to the bait, always says the same
stupid shit. It shows off a less than pleasant side of my personality.
Perhaps I do need some therapy after all...

The problem is that there are people who appear to take him seriously
(newbies, usually). So I do feel that there is some value in showing
how far off the planet he is. His lunacy is not confined to his
monomania regarding FORTH, Inc.

[rickman]

I have to acknowledge my prodding the bear sometimes. I really just
can't resist and I'm not sure why. Responding to him is of no value and
I don't think there is even a chance of altering his behavior in any
meaningful way. He is just so nuts that sometimes I feel compelled to
not ignore it. I will try harder in the future. It does nothing for
this group and I don't think there are any novices that can't see Hugh
for what he is. At least not once they read his attacks on the world.

--

Rick C

[lehs]

Everybody knows that the world would be different without the Jews and the women.
But so far no one has proved that any of these groups is responible for the
Dropbox debacle.

The most and the worst problems in this world are caused by non Jewish men.

[Ron Aaron]

Keep stirring the pot...

[lehs]

What pot? The drop pot?

[Mark Wills]

Meanwhile Dropbox on my Wintel still requires one hundred thousand kilobytes of my RAM to sit there in the background and do nothing.

Just let that sink in for a minute.

How is this progress?

[jenfhaom...@murmic.plus.com]

On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 03:33:35 -0700 (PDT)
Mark Wills <markwi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Meanwhile Dropbox on my Wintel still requires one hundred
> thousand kilobytes of my RAM to sit there in the background
> and do nothing.

Perhaps the gov is looking for aunty steamitic stuff in your
files?

My new (3yr old) turned-off laptop gets wakes up and gets
busy in the middle of the night if I leave the ethernet
plugged in.

Jan, but preferably a different one.

[Cecil Bayona]

Then remove the software, the world can continue existing without that
product.

--
Cecil - k5nwa

[HAA]

Who said it was progress? It's a consumption model similar to the one which
postulates infinite growth on a finite planet.

[Julian Fondren]

On Monday, April 24, 2017 at 10:30:22 PM UTC-5, Julian Fondren wrote:
> On Monday, April 24, 2017 at 8:06:07 PM UTC-5, foxaudio...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > What would you say has prevented Forth from being applied to this problem
> > domain?
> >
>
> What prevented me from applying Forth in this exact instance was
> simply that the tools didn't exist, and that I couldn't justifiably
> write them instead of use tools that did exist.
>
> The tools aren't much:
> 1. make HTTP requests over TLS
> 2. validate JSON
>
> JSON can validated one character at a time with a state machine.
>
> HTTP requests are trivial, but I don't know anything about TLS;
> you could probably use libcurl.
>

Yep, libcurl works and quite easily.

https://bitbucket.org/demonview/forth-libcurl/overview
^ includes a 'refresher' that's very close to the one discussed.