VFX Forth 5.41 now available

[Stephen Pelc]

VFX Forth 5.41 (64 bit editions) is now available for Win, Lin and Mac x64.

https://vfxforth.com/downloads/VfxCommunity/

Stephen
--
Stephen Pelc, ste...@vfxforth.com
MicroProcessor Engineering, Ltd. - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, +44 (0)78 0390 3612,
+34 649 662 974
http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads

[Hugh Aguilar]

On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 8:22:45 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> VFX Forth 5.41 (64 bit editions) is now available for Win, Lin and Mac x64.
>
> https://vfxforth.com/downloads/VfxCommunity/
>
> Stephen

You sabotaged VFX to prevent the ANS-Forth code in my novice-package from
working.
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.forth/c/hp1MbSkew08/m/wMen0WkWAQAJ

On Thursday, February 23, 2023 at 5:53:49 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> On 19 Jan 2023 at 04:34:11 CET, "Hugh Aguilar" <hughag...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > The bug is that this ANS-Forth compliant code causes VFX to crash:
> > ------------------------------------------
> > : lit, ( val -- ) \ runtime: -- val
> > postpone literal ;
> > ------------------------------------------
>
> For the moment define LIT, as
>
> : lit, ( val -- ) \ runtime: -- val
> postpone literal ; doNotSin
>
> An upcoming version of VFX may/will use a different fix and will not require
> DONOTSIN.
>
> Stephen

You said that the upcoming version of VFX may not have the DoNotSin bug-fix
to undo the sabotage to my LIT, word. Maybe so! You did not mention that you
also sabotaged my IF disambiguifier, and that DoNotSin also undoes that
sabotage. You left me to find that out about that sabotage on my own. I stopped
looking for sabotage then, because I don't have time to line-by-line debug the novice
package all of which is ANS-Forth and all of which has been working fine for years.
I just switched to using SwiftForth for my assembler/simulator project --- SwiftForth
is slow as molasses, but that is not sabotage, that is just incompetence at Forth Inc..

Why should anybody believe that this latest version of VFX is not sabotaged
to prevent it from compiling ANS-Forth compliant code?

The fact that you called your sabotage-undo function DoNotSin implies that you
consider yourself to be a god --- what an arrogant dipshit you are!
I think that your credibility is ruined. Nobody will ever trust you again.
What kind of fool sabotages his own compiler??? That was stupid!
This will never be forgotten!

[bruno degazio]

Stephen - Thanks for fixing that problem with externals that return floating point values! I can now update my production system to the latest version. Everything seems to be working without issue.
The compilation speed is now extraordinarily fast - more than 150,000 lines of code in under a second! It's actually faster to compile and launch the app than it is to launch a pre-compiled version through the OS launcher.

By the way, with apologies for hijacking the thread , has anyone come up with a workaround for running Forth on Apple Silicon (I'm referring to the absence of rwx permissions in the "hardened executables" ). Maybe a Cross-compiler approach?

-------------------------------------------------
Prof. Bruno Degazio
Faculty of Animation, Arts and Design,
Sheridan College, Oakville, ON
website:http://sheridan4thyear.blogspot.ca/p/about-bruno-degazio.html

[Brian Fox]

This is interesting for sure.
Are you the only Forth programmer at Sheridan or are there others?

(Ontario resident here)

[Anton Ertl]

bruno degazio <brunog...@gmail.com> writes:
>By the way, with apologies for hijacking the thread , has anyone come up with a workaround for running Forth on Apple Silicon (I'm referring to the absence of rwx permissions in the "hardened executables" ).

1) Use Linux; the problem with RWX permissions is just a MacOS
idiosyncrasy (and only on Apple Silicon), Apple Silicon is capable of
RWX permissions.

2) Use Gforth 0.7.3. It happens to work on MacOS on Apple Silicon,
despite not having been designed for the mmap() degradation that this
OS exhibits. Development Gforth does not; I spent a day last summer
working on the problem, but it did not yield in time.

>Maybe a Cross-compiler approach?

That's not Forth.

- 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: https://forth-standard.org/
EuroForth 2022 proceedings: http://www.euroforth.org/ef22/papers/

[bruno degazio]

On Tuesday, 13 June 2023 at 13:14:47 UTC-4, Anton Ertl wrote:

> bruno degazio writes:
> >By the way, with apologies for hijacking the thread , has anyone come up with a workaround for running Forth on Apple Silicon (I'm referring to the absence of rwx permissions in the "hardened executables" ).
> 1) Use Linux; the problem with RWX permissions is just a MacOS
> idiosyncrasy (and only on Apple Silicon), Apple Silicon is capable of
> RWX permissions.
>
> 2) Use Gforth 0.7.3. It happens to work on MacOS on Apple Silicon,
> despite not having been designed for the mmap() degradation that this
> OS exhibits. Development Gforth does not; I spent a day last summer
> working on the problem, but it did not yield in time.
>
> >Maybe a Cross-compiler approach?
>
> That's not Forth.

Thanks for replying, Anton.

I'm glad to find out that the RWX problem is not burned into the silicon. That allows some hope for the future.

Regarding GForth, it would be great to run it at full speed on Apple Silicon, but I need to use the Apple UI libraries for my application. I do not look forward to re-writing the user interface. Again. (Mac OS9, then to Carbon, most recently to Cocoa)

I agree with you, a cross-compiler approach would not be Forth. But it would at least get my application compiled to executable code and allow me to run it on Apple silicon. :-)

Bruno



——————————

[bruno degazio]

On Tuesday, 13 June 2023 at 12:16:20 UTC-4, Brian Fox wrote:
> This is interesting for sure.
> Are you the only Forth programmer at Sheridan or are there others?

I’m the only one I know of :-) To be clear, I teach music and sound design for animation, not Forth programming. But I’m a Forth old-timer from the early days of the Apple Mac. I still use it constantly (VFX) for my music composition software, the Transformation Engine.

Bruno

[dxforth]

On 8/06/2023 1:22 am, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> VFX Forth 5.41 (64 bit editions) is now available for Win, Lin and Mac x64.
>
> https://vfxforth.com/downloads/VfxCommunity/
>
> Stephen

Has anyone managed to d/l Win 64 v5.41? I keep getting last year's v5.2

[Stephen Pelc]

Whoops! Issue script failure. Fixed and committed. The new installers should
be available around 13:00 CEST today 14 June 2023.

My apologies for the screw-up. Please refresh your browsers.

[Stephen Pelc]

On 13 Jun 2023 at 17:41:28 CEST, "bruno degazio" <brunog...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Stephen - Thanks for fixing that problem with externals that return floating
> point values! I can now update my production system to the latest version.
> Everything seems to be working without issue.

There's also a new callback mechanism to test that uses a notation very
similar to the EXTERN: notation. It can accept and return floats and doubles
as well.

> The compilation speed is now extraordinarily fast - more than 150,000 lines of
> code in under a second! It's actually faster to compile and launch the app
> than it is to launch a pre-compiled version through the OS launcher.

Thanks for that.

> By the way, with apologies for hijacking the thread , has anyone come up with
> a workaround for running Forth on Apple Silicon (I'm referring to the absence
> of rwx permissions in the "hardened executables" ). Maybe a Cross-compiler
> approach?

In the Apple literature, this is the JIT problem. In order to overcome it, the
executable has to ask the O/S for various extra permissions. According to
rumour, the slowdown applies to Intel executables too, but macOS still runs
them. We'll fix it all for the ARM64 (Apple Silicon) release, but ARM64 will
appear for Linux first. We have limited time and staff.

[dxforth]

On 14/06/2023 7:38 pm, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> On 14 Jun 2023 at 04:45:55 CEST, "dxforth" <dxf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 8/06/2023 1:22 am, Stephen Pelc wrote:
>>> VFX Forth 5.41 (64 bit editions) is now available for Win, Lin and Mac x64.
>>>
>>> https://vfxforth.com/downloads/VfxCommunity/
>>>
>>> Stephen
>>
>> Has anyone managed to d/l Win 64 v5.41? I keep getting last year's v5.2
>
> Whoops! Issue script failure. Fixed and committed. The new installers should
> be available around 13:00 CEST today 14 June 2023.
>
> My apologies for the screw-up. Please refresh your browsers.
>
> Stephen

Works now. Thanks!

[Hugh Aguilar]

On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 8:41:31 AM UTC-7, bruno degazio wrote:
> Stephen - Thanks for fixing that problem with externals
> that return floating point values! I can now update my production system
> to the latest version. Everything seems to be working without issue.
> The compilation speed is now extraordinarily fast - more than 150,000 lines of code
> in under a second!

I think that the reason why Stephen Pelc felt comfortable about sabotaging
VFX to fail on ANS-Forth code such as LIT, etc. is that all of my code uses
POSTPONE that is intermediate-level ANS-Forth programming. He feels
comfortable that all VFX customers are novice-level ANS-Forth programmers
who will continue to be novice-level forever. They won't use POSTPONE etc..
The Bruno Degazio's webpage says that he is a music teacher. Toot! Toot!
It is unlikely that he uses POSTPONE enough that he would need
words like LIT, etc.. He may not even know what POSTPONE is.

Stephen Pelc used this exact spelling: doNotSin
This is C-style naming. Forth style would be: do-not-sin
I think that MPE sells VFX primarily to be a scripting language on top of C code.
The real programming is done in C, then script kiddies write VFX scripts
on top of that, and their scripts primarily involve calls to C functions.
Most of these script kiddies have a very novice-level understanding of Forth,
and they have no intention of learning how to write programs in Forth.
They use VFX primarily because it is interactive (the famous outer-interpreter),

I think that Stephen Pelc should tell us what his definition of "sin" is.
When he says, "DO NOT SIN!," but doesn't tell the VFX users what sin is,
this will create a lot of anxiety among MPE customers because they will
never know if they are sinning or not. Yikes! Walking in a minefield!
They can brown-nose Stephen Pelc thoroughly, but if they write a line of
code, they might inadvertently sin against Pelc and crash VFX or (worse)
get spurious results as LIT, provided (sometimes right, sometimes wrong).

There seem to be two "sins" that I committed:
1.) I write advanced-level ANS-Forth code that Stephen Pelc and all of the
Forth-200x committee have failed at. I have SYNONYM in ANS-Forth that
was easy in Forth-83 but that everybody ANS-Forth super-duper has failed
at (given the disambiguifiers though, it is easy) .
2.) I wrote an MSP430 assembler. This is in direct competition with MPE
that sells assemblers. Also, my assembler is far superior to anything that
Stephen Pelc could ever write (he isn't very good at Forth programming).
Documentation is here:
https://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?p=230141#230141

So, if MPE customers agree to never get beyond novice-level ANS-Forth,
and they especially never write an assembler, Pelc will hopefully not
consider them to be sinners. Maybe he will though! Pelc hasn't defined
what exactly a sin is, so you can never know if you are a sinner or not.
I have read that in Stalin's purges, he would do the same. Nobody ever
knew what the rules were, so they had a lot of anxiety because they
could never know when the knock on the door would come. Stalin
would even purge some people arbitrarily, and this was done to
maintain a high level of fear among the survivors that they might be next.
Similarly, in VFX you never know when a bug will crash VFX. Even if your
code is ANS-Forth compliant and seems quite novice-level, you may
have inadvertently written a line of intermediate-level code that is a sin.

[Ron AARON]

On 14/06/2023 20:43, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 8:41:31 AM UTC-7, bruno degazio wrote:
>> Stephen - Thanks for fixing that problem with externals
>> that return floating point values! I can now update my production system
>> to the latest version. Everything seems to be working without issue.
>> The compilation speed is now extraordinarily fast - more than 150,000 lines of code
>> in under a second!
>
> I think that the reason why Stephen Pelc felt comfortable about sabotaging
> VFX to fail on ANS-Forth code such as LIT, etc. is that all of my code uses
> POSTPONE that is intermediate-level ANS-Forth programming. He feels
> comfortable that all VFX customers are novice-level ANS-Forth programmers
> who will continue to be novice-level forever. They won't use POSTPONE etc..
> The Bruno Degazio's webpage says that he is a music teacher. Toot! Toot!
> It is unlikely that he uses POSTPONE enough that he would need
> words like LIT, etc.. He may not even know what POSTPONE is.

/snip

"I think", "I think", "I think"...

Have you ever thought that nobody cares what you think?

[Hugh Aguilar]

Why do you think that Stephen Pelc sabotaged VFX?

[Ron AARON]

On 15/06/2023 20:16, Hugh Aguilar wrote:

>
> Why do you think that Stephen Pelc sabotaged VFX?

I doubt he did. It seems unlikely and unproductive. What is the actual
benefit to him for having done that intentionally?

My experience is that 99.9999% of the time, problems (bugs) are
inadvertent. If you make a claim of intentional sabotage or malicious
intent, the burden of proof is on you.

That said, there are far more productive ways to spend your time and
efforts.

[Hugh Aguilar]

Apparently I shouldn't have used the word "think" for what Ron Aaron does.
Stephen Pelc admitted that this was sabotage when he said that the word
to undo the sabotage was: doNotSin
He targeted my IF disambiguifier --- presumably all 51 of the disambiguifiers,
although I haven't checked because that is a waste of my time.
Stephen Pelc is ashamed (or should be) because he said that the
disamibuifiers don't work, but they obviously do work. I wrote a
SYNONYM and early-binding MACRO: that depend on the disambiguifiers.
His sabotage of LIT, was a bad idea because this is intermediate-level
ANS-Forth (it could be considered novice-level, really), so a lot of his
customers might write this and get stung with the sabotage. He likely
realized that I could get rid of all the disambiguifiers and all the code
(mostly SYNONYM and MACRO:) that depend on the disambiguifiers,
so he hit LIT, too --- this was more subtle sabotage because it would not
crash, but it would compile code with the wrong literal value --- he assumed
that this would create hard-to-find bugs throughout the novice-package,
but I actually found that LIT, was the problem quickly (he misunderestimated
by debugging skill) --- also, LIT, is such simple code that I immediately realized
that this was sabotage, which wouldn't have been apparent if this was some
over-complicated code that I had written that might have a bug of mine in it.

You ask:

"What is the actual benefit to him for having done that intentionally?"

You ask this implying that because I can't provide an answer, this disproves
my assertion that he sabotaged VFX. Really???
You need to learn a little bit about logic.
I can prove (as shown above) that Stephen Pelc sabotaged VFX without
being able to describe how doing so would benefit Stephen Pelc in any way.
There is no benefit to Stephen Pelc!!! He has ruined his credibility forever.
He was mostly likely deeply ashamed because he failed to invent the
disambiguifiers and the rquotations, plus he was frightened because he read
my HJA430 documentation (the MSP430 assembler) and he knew that I was
already ahead of him in regard to assembler writing --- so he became angry,
reached for the only gun that he had, and shot himself in the foot. OOPS!

[Hugh Aguilar]

On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 8:41:31 AM UTC-7, bruno degazio wrote:

> Stephen - Thanks for fixing that problem with externals that
> return floating point values! I can now update my production system
> to the latest version. Everything seems to be working without issue.
> The compilation speed is now extraordinarily fast - more than
> 150,000 lines of code in under a second!

Stephen Pelc should feel proud that he has a user with a program
containing more than 150,000 lines of code. Dang! I'm not at that level!

I type 55 words per minute. When I'm programming though, it is much
less because I have to slow down to think, plus there is the testing and
debugging phase during which I'm not typing in code. I might be able to
produce 1 line of working code every 10 minutes. This is a very generous
estimate of my programming speed; I'm not really that fast --- but lets
assume that Bruno Degazio can produce 1 line of code every 10 minutes.
This means that it takes 3125 workdays to type in 150,000 lines of code.
There are about 260 workdays in a year, so it would take Bruno Degazio
over 12 years to write his 150,000 line program (presumably his secretary
brings him coffee so he doesn't have to step away from the computer).

Most professional musicians are like Todd Rundgren who sang:
------------------------------------------------------------
I don't want to work
I want to bang on the drum all day
------------------------------------------------------------
Not the music teacher Bruno Degazio though!
He works hard, typing code in continuously all day every day,
year after year, until he has a 150,000 line program to feel proud of!
And then the whole shebang compiles in under one second!

[dxforth]

Informed of the existence of a bug, Stephen said he would fix it. What more
were you expecting?

> He was mostly likely deeply ashamed because he failed to invent the
> disambiguifiers and the rquotations, plus he was frightened because he read
> my HJA430 documentation (the MSP430 assembler) and he knew that I was
> already ahead of him in regard to assembler writing --- so he became angry,
> reached for the only gun that he had, and shot himself in the foot. OOPS!

"mostly likely" isn't proof - it's the same 'I think' suppositions repeated.
Show us this assembler that nobody has seen and of which we should all be
afeared and ashamed.

[Ron AARON]

On 17/06/2023 4:38, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> On Thursday, June 15, 2023 at 11:45:53 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
>> On 15/06/2023 20:16, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Why do you think that Stephen Pelc sabotaged VFX?
>> I doubt he did. It seems unlikely and unproductive. What is the actual
>> benefit to him for having done that intentionally?
>>
>> My experience is that 99.9999% of the time, problems (bugs) are
>> inadvertent. If you make a claim of intentional sabotage or malicious
>> intent, the burden of proof is on you.
>>
>> That said, there are far more productive ways to spend your time and
>> efforts.
>
> Apparently I shouldn't have used the word "think" for what Ron Aaron does.

Who hurt you so much in your childhood that your insecurities lead you
to immediately stoop to ad-hominem attacks?

My response to you was neutral in tone and based upon my experience.
Your response was just as I expected from you, but disappointing
nonetheless. SAD!

[ccur...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 12:37:45 AM UTC-4, Ron AARON wrote:

> Who hurt you so much in your childhood that your insecurities lead you
> to immediately stoop to ad-hominem attacks?
>
> My response to you was neutral in tone and based upon my experience.
> Your response was just as I expected from you, but disappointing
> nonetheless. SAD!

IMO, he's just a sad troll, lashing out for any attention he can get.

"Don't feed the trolls". I also find it very hard to refrain from engaging them.

[dxforth]

"Don't feed the trolls" is asking one to pick a side.

[none albert]

Would CHATGPT be able to remove non-topic post from a
comp.lang.forth archive? That would be nice!

Also note that the subject line was not maintained. (I have changed the
subject line, because I changed the subject.)
A warning about this would also be nice.

Groetjes Albert
--
Don't praise the day before the evening. One swallow doesn't make spring.
You must not say "hey" before you have crossed the bridge. Don't sell the
hide of the bear until you shot it. Better one bird in the hand than ten in
the air. First gain is a cat spinning. - the Wise from Antrim -

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 14:44:02 +0200
albert@cherry.(none) (albert) wrote:

[]

>
> Would CHATGPT be able to remove non-topic post from a
> comp.lang.forth archive? That would be nice!
>
> Also note that the subject line was not maintained. (I have changed the
> subject line, because I changed the subject.)
> A warning about this would also be nice.
>

Implement CHATGPT in Forth in <8k!

</rugoli> I think.


--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[Hugh Aguilar]

On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 8:22:45 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:

> VFX Forth 5.41 (64 bit editions) is now available for Win, Lin and Mac x64.

My expectation has been that Stephen Pelc would "invent" the rquotations
as a proprietary feature of VFX. He wants the Paysan-faked quotations
to be in Forth-200x so he can say:
"If you want quotations that have the crucial feature of accessing the
parent function's local variables, you have to pay for VFX. If you use
a Forth-200x system such as the internet freebie gForth, all you get
are the worthless quotations that lack this crucial feature."
This is why Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan wrote an article in EuroForth
in which they lied and said that the rquotations lack this crucial feature.
They were paving the way for Stephen Pelc to "invent" rquotations
that have this crucial feature.

So, does this new version of VFX have quotations with the crucial feature,
or does it still have the Paysan-faked quotations like the last VFX version?

I have no way of finding this out myself because I can't run VFX on my
computer. Stephen Pelc sabotaged VFX to crash on the ANS-Forth compliant
code in my novice package. Maybe he has now sabotaged VFX to reformat
my hard-drive when it detects code that appears to be from my novice-package.
VFX is malware. There is no telling what bad result will come from running
VFX on a computer --- anything from a crash (we have already seen this with
LIT, and the disambiguifiers) up to erasing the hard-drive. Somebody else
should take the risk of running VFX and finding out if Stephen Pelc
"invented" the rquotations yet as a proprietary feature of VFX, then post this
information on comp.lang.forth --- I'm not taking the risk of running
known malware on my computer --- some Pelc sycophant can risk it!

Ultimately, the rquotations with the crucial feature are more important
to the future of Forth than the entire Forth-200x committee put together.
This is the key to supporting general-purpose data-structures and
moving ahead of ANSI-C that lacks this crucial feature.

[dxforth]

On 28/06/2023 10:44 pm, albert wrote:
> In article <u7h1cl$1o24u$1...@dont-email.me>, dxforth <dxf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 28/06/2023 6:35 am, ccur...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 12:37:45 AM UTC-4, Ron AARON wrote:
>>>
>>>> Who hurt you so much in your childhood that your insecurities lead you
>>>> to immediately stoop to ad-hominem attacks?
>>>>
>>>> My response to you was neutral in tone and based upon my experience.
>>>> Your response was just as I expected from you, but disappointing
>>>> nonetheless. SAD!
>>> IMO, he's just a sad troll, lashing out for any attention he can get.
>>>
>>> "Don't feed the trolls". I also find it very hard to refrain from
>> engaging them.
>>
>> "Don't feed the trolls" is asking one to pick a side.
>>
>
> Would CHATGPT be able to remove non-topic post from a
> comp.lang.forth archive? That would be nice!

"Nice - giving pleasure or satisfaction"

Perhaps one could filter out everything one deems unpleasant and create
a bubble universe consisting only of one's prejudices. Traditionally
money and power has been used for that. Perhaps it's no surprise AI is
being considered.

[Stephen Pelc]

On 28 Jun 2023 at 18:48:04 CEST, "Hugh Aguilar" <hughag...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I have no way of finding this out myself because I can't run VFX on my
> computer.

Of course you can. You just do not have the guts to do it.

[Hugh Aguilar]

On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 2:37:51 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> On 28 Jun 2023 at 18:48:04 CEST, "Hugh Aguilar" <hughag...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I have no way of finding this out myself because I can't run VFX on my

> > computer. h

> Of course you can. You just do not have the guts to do it.
> Stephen

I don't have the guts to run known malware on my computer.
You have already sabotaged VFX to crash when it detected code
from my novice-package, although the code is ANS-Forth compliant.
What is the next level of your VFX sabotage? Erase my hard-disk?

Why don't you just tell me. Did you "invent" (steal) the rquotations
for this version of VFX or do you still have the worthless Paysan-faked
quotations that you had in the previous version? With the Paysan-faked
quotations in VFX you look like an idiot, but with the rquotations you
look like an intellectual-property thief. Which do you prefer?

Also, define the word "sin" so that all of your potential customers can know
if you consider them to be sinners or not, and if your sabotage of VFX
will be aimed at them or not.
I wrote an MSP430 assembler --- in the Middle Ages I would have been
burned at the stake for that! --- now you sabotage VFX to stop me.

[dxforth]

Giordano Bruno and Joan of Arc would have had the guts to run VFX on
their computer.

[Jurgen Pitaske]

What a heap of BULLSHIT .
You are just talking.

It would be simple and no risk - probably too simple for you ,
to ask around who has a PC in the corner, not used ,
to prove it either way.
But this is too risky for you.
Then you would not have anything to complain about anymore.

PROVE IT OR SHUT UP.

Or you could buy a cheap laptop for £100 and prove it.

[Stephen Pelc]

On 30 Jun 2023 at 01:53:26 CEST, "Hugh Aguilar" <hughag...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I don't have the guts to run known malware on my computer.
> You have already sabotaged VFX to crash when it detected code
> from my novice-package, although the code is ANS-Forth compliant.
> What is the next level of your VFX sabotage? Erase my hard-disk?

You now admit that you can run VFX on your computer, and you "know"
that VFX can detect your code. I really cannot be bothered with the
novice package when people with apps of 155,000 and 1.2M SLOC
are pleasant and easy to deal with.

> Why don't you just tell me. Did you "invent" (steal) the rquotations
> for this version of VFX or do you still have the worthless Paysan-faked
> quotations that you had in the previous version? With the Paysan-faked
> quotations in VFX you look like an idiot, but with the rquotations you
> look like an intellectual-property thief. Which do you prefer?

Are you lazy or stupid? The assumption of either/or could be
considered both. We have all dealt with this since childhood, so
a third choice could be childish. This fallacious argument is an
example of a false dichotomy.

https://www.ucm.es/data/cont/docs/107-2016-02-17-Fallacious%20Arguments.pdf
Excluded Middle (False Dichotomy, Faulty Dilemma, Bifurcation):
assuming there are only two alternatives when in fact there are more. For
example,
assuming Atheism is the only alternative to Fundamentalism, or being a traitor
is
the only alternative to being a loud patriot.

You and I could trade insults for ever, but I choose only to permit
myself an annual round, and I usually regret the waste of time
afterwards.

VFX has the same quotations as described in the Forth standard.

> Also, define the word "sin" so that all of your potential customers can know
> if you consider them to be sinners or not, and if your sabotage of VFX
> will be aimed at them or not.

Once upon a when, VFX re-ran source code to improve performance.
When it was proven that this technique cannot produce compliant
code, we replaced the source inliner with the tokeniser. Your question
as to the meaning of "sin" is answered in the first paragraph
of the manual section about the tokeniser. This documentation
has been available to you for many, many years, probably since 2009.

\ *P From VFX Forth v4.3, build 2825, the tokeniser replaces the
\ ** previous source inliner. The change was made to improve ANS
\ ** and Forth200x standards compliance, and to reduce issues
\ ** with particularly "guru" code. To prevent breaking your
\ ** existing code, the tokeniser uses the same word names for
\ ** its control words. The abbreviation "sin" is short for "source
\ ** inline".

[Hugh Aguilar]

On Friday, June 30, 2023 at 2:05:46 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> VFX has the same quotations as described in the Forth standard.

You don't know how to implement general-purpose data-structures.
VFX has never provided any general-purpose data-structures and
there is no evidence to indicate that you or anybody else on the
Forth-200x committee know how to implement such a thing.
Your employee Peter Knaggs, also a Forth-200x committee member,
failed to implement a linked-list --- that is pathetic incompetence!
Your failure to understand the concept of general-purpose data-structures
is why you accept the Paysan-faked quotations that are worthless.

> > Also, define the word "sin" so that all of your potential customers can know
> > if you consider them to be sinners or not, and if your sabotage of VFX
> > will be aimed at them or not.
> Once upon a when, VFX re-ran source code to improve performance.
> When it was proven that this technique cannot produce compliant
> code, we replaced the source inliner with the tokeniser. Your question
> as to the meaning of "sin" is answered in the first paragraph
> of the manual section about the tokeniser. This documentation
> has been available to you for many, many years, probably since 2009.
>
> \ *P From VFX Forth v4.3, build 2825, the tokeniser replaces the
> \ ** previous source inliner. The change was made to improve ANS
> \ ** and Forth200x standards compliance, and to reduce issues
> \ ** with particularly "guru" code. To prevent breaking your
> \ ** existing code, the tokeniser uses the same word names for
> \ ** its control words. The abbreviation "sin" is short for "source
> \ ** inline".

This is bullshit!
My novice-package worked fine under VFX for many, many years,
since 2010. Then with this recent VFX version you specifically targeted
the disambiguifiers with sabotage of VFX, and the word to undo
the sabotage is doNotSin. LIT, and the disambiguifiers aren't "guru code"
(whatever that means). This is just the use of POSTPONE inside of a
colon definition.

You have been attacking the disambiguifiers with lies.
Now you claim that it is just a coincidence that VFX fails on the
disambiguifiers, and the word to fix this is: doNotSin

On Tuesday, August 1, 2017 at 2:27:41 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 21:28:18 -0700 (PDT), hughag...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> >My complaint against Stephen Pelc is that he uses dishonest business practi=
> >ces. He supports ANS-Forth and Forth-200x for the purpose of making all For=
> >th programmers look stupid. He doesn't actually use ANS-Forth himself. He r=
> >outinely provides vendor-specific code in VFX, even when it is easy to writ=
> >e the code in ANS-Forth, for the purpose of trapping his customers in vendo=
> >r lock-in. A good example is SYNONYM --- I can write this in ANS-Forth usin=
> >g my disambiguifiers --- he insists that this is impossible to write in ANS=
> >-Forth --- he refuses to admit that the disambiguifiers exist because he wa=
> >nts ANS-Forth's FIND to behave differently in every ANS-Forth compiler.
>
> Hugh's wonderful disambiguifiers do NOT do what the great Hugh thinks
> they do. What the great Hugh has done is to redefine a large number of
> words so that they behave in a very restricted way to support the
> great Hugh's version of Forth. Hugh's SYNONYM is not portable ANS
> Forth unless you use Hugh's Forth. Bah, humbug. Another emperor
> with no clothes.
>
> Stephen

You are a liar!
This is described here:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.forth/c/T-yYkpVwYew/m/fnXe90wUAgAJ

You want people to be "pleasant" to you --- this means that you want
brown-nosers who accept your blatant lies without question --- you find it
quite unpleasant when your blatant lies are pointed out in public.

[Jurgen Pitaske]

What a heap of BULLSHIT .
You are just talking.

It would be simple and no risk - probably too simple for you ,
to ask around who has a PC in the corner, not used ,
to prove it either way.
But this is too risky for you.
Then you would not have anything to complain about anymore.

PROVE IT OR SHUT UP.

Or you could buy a cheap laptop for £100 and prove it.

And sell it on ebay and make money after you could not prove it.