Hugh Aguilar - TESTRA - What really happened there?

[Jurgen Pitaske]

And why Hugh Aguilar is as frustrated as we have seen here
over the last 10 to 20 years.

He has been agressive for so many years here,
and at least we now know that

he has been fired from TESTRA after about one year there.

It seems he is intelligent,
so why has there not more been produced since then?

This is for others to discuss.
Beyond my knowledge regarding Forth Programming.

As I had stated here,
I would ask after so many accusations

TESTRA directly, as I know them, and

as they are always used as such a brilliant work experience.

The official answer from Tom Hart, their president,
who agreed to have his answer to me published on clf:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hi Juergen,

Nice to hear from you. I was going to answer your prior Email, but got busy.

Some answers regarding your questions:

Is it possible for you to tell
For how long he was an employee of Testra if he was

I did not go back and look at the payroll records,
but to my recollection it was on the order of a year or so.

Or if he was just a contractor/consultant

Maybe at the beginning.

How long this working relationship lasted

As I stated, maybe a year or so.

Why your relationship ceased,

He was difficult to work with.
He did fine if it was something he could do by himself without supervision,
but if it was a team effort, forget it.

I let him go myself,
after I had given him a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.
He would not take any direction.
I scrapped the project.

and what he really achieved at TESTRA??

He wrote our Forth compiler for the processor
that we implemented in a Lattice PLD.

He did a good job on it,
we are still using it with a few bug fixes and minor modifications.

He had nothing to do with the processor itself,
that was all designed by John Hart and Steve Brault.

The PLD version was based upon our original Forth Engine done long before we ever ran across Hugh.

In summary,

Hugh is very intelligent, very knowledgeable about Forth,
but is not really a team player.

Sounds like the Forth community has some problems with non team players.

You can quote me, but it has to be all or none of the above!


Thomas W. Hart, Jr.
President
Testra Corporation
1201 N Stadem Drive
Tempe AZ 85281
tom...@testra.com
www.testra.com
(480)560-6141 cell
(480)966-8428 office
(480)966-7215 fax


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

and for completeness the email I had sent to TESTRA and I had posted here somewhere before I had sent it:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Regarding: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/9IHvRJmMn20

Dear Tom,

We have not spoken for a while.
This email is not really regarding business now, but trying to put the history right.
Regarding Testra and regarding Hugh Aguilar.

Hugh Aguilar basically says for years here on clf. that he has basically invented the MFX processor of Testra,
And the software that basically runs the company TESTRA.

I do not mind if this were true, but I really doubt it,
as now – over probably 10 or 20 years -
Not much has been published/ posted by him as far as I have seen;

– rather than these insults and telling other people are liars and worse
– actually everybody who has a different opinion.

According to his info he gave here,
he now drives taxis or tractors for a living.
No reference to any programming.

See his last post from Comp Lang Forth; this triggered this email to Testra:

On Wednesday, June 12, 2019 at 10:11:21 AM UTC-7, Anton Ertl wrote:
> EuroForth 2019 will be held in Hamburg, Germany on September 13-15.
>
> The deadline for the academic stream (refereed) papers is June 30. So
> now is the time to write up your research to have it ready by the
> deadline. For industrial (non-refereed) papers the deadline is August
> 31.
I have been reading some "inspiring Mark Twain quotes on life"
http://www.quoteambition.com/inspiring-mark-twain-quotes-life/

This quote should be very inspiring for the EuroForth writers:
“Never tell the truth to people who are not worthy of it.”

Anton Ertl is the referee for the "academic" papers.
He and Bernd Paysan wrote a refereed paper for EuroForth-2018
that had no purpose except to attack the rquotations.
They lied when they said:
"the higher-order word that calls the rquotation must not use locals."

AFAIK, Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan are lying about the rquotations
as a service to Stephen Pelc who will later "invent" rquotations
or something similar as a proprietary VFX feature
Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan don't believe that the Forthers
are worthy of being given rquotations for free, but instead believe
that Forthers must pay Stephen Pelc for this feature.

> The call for papers including submission instructions can be found on
> <http://www.euroforth.org/ef19/cfp.html>.
The actual "submission instructions" EuroForth aspirants need,
are obtained by getting on your knees and asking Stephen Pelc.
You may be told to attack my code by lying about it.
You may be told to not invent useful Forth features that
Stephen Pelc plans on inventing later as proprietary VFX features.
You may be told to not write any working Forth code, but instead
to submit vague dreams about what it would be like to write
working Forth code (as Peter Knaggs and Andrew Haley did).

Ultimately, everybody who goes to EuroForth will dishonor themselves
with blatant lying and purposeful ignorance.


Such and worse posts come on a daily / weekly basis as you can verify yourself.
I have been a target myself as well.

Is it possible for you to tell
For how long he was an employee of Testra if he was
Or if he was just a contractor/consultant
How long this working relationship lasted
Why your relationship ceased,
and what he really achieved at TESTRA??



Some partial answers would be very helpful already.

Just to make it clear:
I have no business relationship with MPE anymore so this is a purely private activity.

But as it makes me sick how he behaves on clf,

It was worth at least trying to find out and write this email,

to find out
if what he states about your relationship is true and his software runs or did run TESTRA
or if this can be put right.

This email sent to you has been published as is on clf as well.

Please mark in your answer to me,
which part of your answer I can quote.

Thank you very much in advance.

Kind regards
Juergen

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now the facts about his history are clearer.

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 12:08:59 PM UTC-4, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

<---snip--->

> Now the facts about his history are clearer.

I don't think there was anything there we didn't already know. I can only think your posting of this exchange was a form of retribution which says much more about who you are than it did Hugh.

Hugh has his problems which border on mental illness. I blame Forth for bringing out the worst in people like Hugh, Peter Forsau and yourself.

Do you have these same issues in other areas?

--

Rick C.

- Get 10,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Jurgen Pitaske]

What you know and do not know I do not care about - and who does?

Actually, the only mental illnesses and their impersonments and reactions I have met until now are
Hugh
Forsau and
Rick C.

Gavino is/was soft in comparison to you lot.

The rest of the world as I know it is fine
- which does not exclude that the same happens elsewhere I do not know of.

I do like your arrogance though
- why do you expect that this was for you?

There are probably hundreds or thousands of Forthers in the world who do not understand what is happening in this group.

Now they have the context and from the Horses Mouth.
And they will have this here for the many years to come.

[Rick C]

And they all see you are as disruptive as the worst of them, even starting threads to "set the record straight". In this regard, you are very much like Hugh and Peter Forsau.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[dxforth]

On Saturday, 14 September 2019 02:52:06 UTC+10, Rick C wrote:
> ...
> I blame Forth for bringing out the worst […]

You've noticed that :)

Chuck described Forth as 'an amplifier' - a double-edged sword
if ever there was. Given Forth's scope for extension and the
means to do so who has resisted the temptation to 'play God'
deciding what is good for all. Forth doesn't exactly encourage
'team players'. OTOH given enough time - who knows - it may
also knock off the hard edges and corners of the stony Gods it
so readily produces.

[Rick C]

Actually, I should not have said it that way. Forth doesn't impact anyone's behavior. But the fact that it is so far from the mainstream, by definition it is going to attract those who think along the periphery of computer programming. Those people are likely to be thinking along the periphery in other areas as well.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Melzzzzz]

On 2019-09-13, Jurgen Pitaske <jpit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why your relationship ceased,
>
> He was difficult to work with.

Social skills are perhaps more important then
anything else...


--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
U ničemu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec
Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi
bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala

[hughag...@gmail.com]

Juergen Pintaske is fabricating this.

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> ...

> Is it possible for you to tell
> For how long he was an employee of Testra if he was
>
> I did not go back and look at the payroll records,
> but to my recollection it was on the order of a year or so.
>
> Or if he was just a contractor/consultant
>
> Maybe at the beginning.

I worked for Testra on two different occasions.
The first time was when I wrote MFX.
I then left and worked as an IBM370 assembly-language programmer
for 18 months. I also worked in cabinet-making for a while.
I then returned to Testra and wrote DXF2G which converted AutoCAD .dxf
files into CNC gcode programs for the laser etcher.

Juergen is vague about this because he is just making this stuff up.
Tom and John Hart do have those records readily available.
They wouldn't be so vague and inaccurate answering a direct question.

I left Testra because the money was too low,
and they weren't providing me with health insurance although
their other employee got health insurance.
It was a dead-end job --- I knew that the motion-control board
would be the only application ever for the MiniForth, and I wasn't
involved in the motion-control stuff, so there was no point in staying.
At the time (late 1990s) both Tom and John Hart were about 60 years old,
which is retirement age. There weren't going to be any future projects.

I remember John Hart telling me:
"You would be a lot more valuable if you could build and test boards."
This seemed unfair --- I never claimed to be a hardware technician ---
I signed on as a programmer, not a soldering-iron jockey.

> Why your relationship ceased,
>
> He was difficult to work with.
> He did fine if it was something he could do by himself without supervision,
> but if it was a team effort, forget it.
>
> I let him go myself,
> after I had given him a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.
> He would not take any direction.
> I scrapped the project.

I never heard of HP-GL prior to seeing it now in Juergen's post.
I looked it up this morning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP-GL
This is apparently a graphics language for plotters.
Testra had no involvement in building plotters; they didn't even own one.
It is possible that Testra got involved in plotters after I left
(plotters are an obvious application for their motion-control board),
but I don't know anything about this. I have never worked with plotters.
Juergen got his facts tangled up --- most likely, he doesn't know the
difference between a pen-plotter and a CNC milling-machine or laser-etcher.

Testra was (still is) a very small company. There was no team programming.
There was only one other employee; he lived in Tucson and I never met him.
He was responsible for porting the motion-control program over from the
Dallas 80c320 board to the MiniForth board. He wrote this in MFX.
I never saw the source-code for the motion-control board and had no
involvement in that --- I just wrote MFX --- the motion-control program
is the only program ever written in MFX and I wasn't involved.
I occasionally got emails from that guy requesting features in MFX,
but for the most part MFX just had to be similar enough to Forth-83
to allow porting the motion-control program with minimal fuss.
I remember that he was ticked off because I took too long to write
the 16-bit addition function (because I didn't know how), and then
he wrote it himself --- that is the only complaint I recall from him.

> Sounds like the Forth community has some problems with non team players.

This is obviously Juergen Pintaske's words, not Tom or John Hart's words.

* Tom and John Hart are not members of the so-called: "Forth community."
They did not build and sell an experimenters' board for the MiniForth,
despite my encouraging them to do so. Tom Hart explained:
"Hobbyists require too much support and they don't have any money."
They had sold their bit-slice Forth-engine experimenters' board in
"Forth Dimensions," but that was about decade prior to me working for them.
Most likely this involved too much support and not enough money.
I might have stuck with Testra if they had done this, because I like
hobbyists, but all they cared about was selling motion-control boards.

* They did not get involved in Elizabeth Rather's ANS-Forth "Standard."

* They are not involved in Stephen Pelc's Forth-200x "Standard."

It is Juergen Pintaske who worries about the "Forth community."
Tom and John Hart worry about a lot of things (mostly they worry about
keeping Testra afloat by selling a stream of motion-control boards),
but the "Forth community" is not something they give a hoot in Hell for.
This is why they don't post on c.l.f. --- they don't care about you.

BTW: For decades, there was no mention at all of the MiniForth/RACE
on the SVFIG website. Just today I discovered that Testra has an entry:
http://www.forth.org/cores.html
I thought Testra had been banned from that website, but apparently not.

[dxforth]

On Saturday, 14 September 2019 14:32:18 UTC+10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> ...

> Tom and John Hart do have those records readily available.
> They wouldn't be so vague and inaccurate answering a direct question.

I'm puzzled why they're giving out personal information to third parties
with no apparent legal right to know.

[Ilya Tarasov]

> And why Hugh Aguilar is as frustrated as we have seen here
> over the last 10 to 20 years.

There are many people in the world with their own characters, skills, addictions etc. I wonder why do you want to 'reveal' Hugh's... defects? Or what is your goal? Hugh is an adult man and certainly responsible for what he doing. I think many of those who contact him are able to make his own opinion about Hugh... and you. Intresting, your post bring me more information about YOU what about Hugh.

A phrase I can support (from great Soviet actress Faina Ranevskaya).
'It is better to be a good person, 'swearing obscene' than a quiet, well-educated stinker'. So I prefer to deal with Hugh as long as he keeping honesty in his word than perform unfair intrigues around scrap of brilliant era of Forth.

[Rick C]

Can I ask if you write in English or your native tongue and then translate it? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm asking an honest question. Sometimes the words you choose seem unusual and I'm not sure of the meaning.

You have likely heard the (rather old) story of the new computer translator. In a public exhibition someone suggested to translate "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak" from English to Russian and back. It came out, "The vodka is good, but the meet is rotten".

I don't get what you mean by, "around scrap of brilliant era of Forth".

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[hughag...@gmail.com]

They don't give out personal information to third parties.
John Hart is careful about this --- I assume Tom Hart is too.

I remember one time a hiring manager called John Hart about me,
and she had her phone on speaker so I could listen in.
John Hart provided the dates that I was employed, and he said:
"Not eligible for rehire."
He did not provide any colorful commentary such as:
"He was difficult to work with. ...if it was a team effort, forget it."
Saying that I'm ineligible for rehire is more than adequate to kill
my chance of getting hired at the job I was applying for.

Juergen Pintaske is totally faking this stuff.
The fact that he said HP-GL rather than CNC gcode is a dead giveaway.
The languages are somewhat similar in that they both involve moving
an instrument (colored-pen, milling-tool or laser-mirror) over a surface,
but they are different languages. Most likely Juergen doesn't know
that they are different. I didn't know that either --- I always assumed
that plotters used CNC gcode --- now, thanks to Wikipedia, I have learned
that plotters use HP-GL (maybe only Hewlett-Packard plotters though).

Also, he is obviously faking it because his emphasis on me being a
"non team player" is totally out of character for Tom or John Hart.
They aren't team players either --- they are not in the ANS-Forth cult.
For them to criticize me for not being a team player is about as
likely as Donald Trump criticizing me for having a bad haircut.
That would really be a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

I don't think that Tom or John Hart want to drive a stake through my heart
to prevent me from rising again (like in the book: "Salem's Lot").
I've talked to them since that time and they floated the idea that
I could work with them again --- most likely, because they haven't been
able to find anybody who could figure out the MFX assembly-language
(the assembly-language is very difficult to use because there are no
branch or jump instructions other than the NXT instruction).
I wasn't interested --- as I said, it is dead-end job.
It is a bad idea to become an expert in something obscure because
listing it as a reference doesn't help in obtaining employment in a
normal line of work, such as C programming or ditch-digging.

As a final note, let me say that Ilya Tarasov is the only person on
c.l.f. who can understand why the MiniForth lacked branch or jump
instructions. I have never met anybody else who knew anything about
VLIW processors (although many who claim to be big experts).

[Robert L.]

On 9/13/2019, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.

This may be a good programming puzzle.

Can someone give the specifications? (Start a new thread.)

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 8:52:11 AM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
> On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 11:44:10 AM UTC-4, Ilya Tarasov wrote:

> > A phrase I can support (from great Soviet actress Faina Ranevskaya).
> > 'It is better to be a good person, 'swearing obscene' than a
> > quiet, well-educated stinker'. So I prefer to deal with Hugh
> > as long as he keeping honesty in his word than perform
> > unfair intrigues around scrap of brilliant era of Forth.
>
> Can I ask if you write in English or your native tongue
> and then translate it? I'm not trying to be insulting,
> I'm asking an honest question. Sometimes the words you choose
> seem unusual and I'm not sure of the meaning.

> ...

> I don't get what you mean by,
> "around scrap of brilliant era of Forth".

This is not a language problem --- you're just a dummkoph.

The development of the MiniForth (1994-1995) was a pretty
brilliant era of Forth. I'm not aware of anybody else who
has succeeded in getting a processor to run on the
Lattice 1048isp PLD --- maybe a toy processor that had no
practical use --- the MiniForth was not a toy though; it
provided better performance and lower cost than the MC68000
board that the competitor in the laser-etching biz was using.

The MiniForth was really the last hurrah of Forth,
and then Forth died --- ANS-Forth put a stake through the
heart of Forth --- Forth is unlikely to ever rise again.

On the subject of fakes --- I think that you are faking your
soft-core expertise. I will leave it to Ilya to comment on that
though, as he knows more about the subject than I do.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

I don't actually know anything about HP-GL.
I only just read about HP-GL on Wikipedia a few days ago.

I did write a program at Testra to convert AutoCAD .dxf files into
CNC gcode --- the program was called DXF2G.
This is too complicated to qualify as a "programming puzzle."

I remember that the AutoCAD documentation was incorrect in some aspects
and so I had to figure out the .dxf format through examination.
Also, .dxf files support crude subroutines for common images,
and gcode also supports crude subroutines similarly, but I didn't
support subroutines at all because subroutines are rarely used.
I could have supported subroutines if this had become an issue.

After I figured out the .dxf format, the program to convert into
gcode was pretty easy and straightforward. I would expect that
converting into HP-GL would be similarly easy. My slide-rule
image generator produces both gcode and PostScript. This is easy.

What made DXF2G difficult was the requirement that when
two line segments' end points have a gap between them of 5 mils
or less, the line segments should be extended so the lines touch.
This allows the CNC machine to just do a series of GO1 instructions,
and not have them punctuated with tiny little G00 empty segments.
This was not too difficult either. I quickly got this working,
not just for straight line-segments (G01) but also for curved
line segments (G02 and G03). This is just trigonometry.

The real difficulty was that the .dxf data was basically garbage.
I think the image was scanned in from a pencil drawing on paper with
over-great resolution and then somehow converted into a .dxf file.
Quite a lot of line-segments were less than 5 mils in length and
were randomly oriented. There were thousands of these tiny little
line-segments. The image, when viewed from a distance, appeared to
be a single image corresponding to the pencil drawing.
In actuality, it was thousands of tiny little squiggles,
most of which intersected each other, sometimes multiple times.

The obvious solution would be to just round off all the data in the
.dxf file to 5 mils resolution, and then discard resulting duplicates.
This doesn't actually work though.
The resulting gcode etching comes out blocky. It looks awful,
similar to graphics images on a Commodore C64 screen.
All artistic nuance is lost!

If I were writing such a program today, I would round-off to 5 mils
as described above, but then I would do a polynomial curve-fit
over the resulting points to get rid of the blocky problem.
Splines would be an even better solution, although I didn't know
about splines then (and I still don't know anything about the subject).
I'm good at high-school analytic-trigonometry, but I'm not a mathematician.
I didn't do any kind of curve-fitting at the time.
My program took over 30 minutes to run on as it was.
This was using 32-bit UR/Forth on a Pentium with a DOS-extender.
Too much floating point arithmetic would have killed the speed.
What I did was apply a set of rules for simplifying the tiny squiggles,
and then do the line-extension or curve-extension to connect them together.
This worked.
I can't guarantee that it would always work --- I think it is
possible to confuse the rules by writing a pathological .dxf file.
It did work for the customer-provided .dxf file though. Yay!

That whole program became very complicated, although initially it seemed
like it would be easy. It was something of a fool's errand,
because the data was basically garbage --- computers don't come with
mind-reading ability --- there is no way for my program to know
what the artist with the pencil and paper intended.
The image was a drawing of a coyote. A human viewing the result can say:
"That does [or does not] look like a coyote."
Unfortunately, computers don't know what coyotes look like,
so it is difficult for the program to know if the result is good or not.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 6:09:05 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> What I did was apply a set of rules for simplifying the tiny squiggles,
> and then do the line-extension or curve-extension to connect them together.
> This worked.

I was thinking about this last night and I recalled that I did not do
a "line extension" in the sense of just extending the two line segments
outward until they meet.

What I did was to always connect the two line segments with a
partial circle (a G02 or G03 instruction). I would calculate where
the center point of this circle had to be so that the partial circle
would be tangent to both line segments. This was true whether the
line-segments were straight (G01) or if they were partial circles
(G02 or G03).

This calculation was not too difficult. It was just trigonometry.
It did involve several floating-point calculations though,
and on the Pentium this was slow. IIRC, the Pentium had the x87
built-in (the 80486 had an external 80487) --- this helped the
speed, but floating-point was still a bottleneck.

I remember that I had an old 80486 at home (given to me by Testra),
but at work I had a Pentium on my desk. I remember that I learned
about the U and V pipes in the Pentium from Abrash's book, so I
knew about "riscifying" assembly-language. This means, arranging the code
sothat the V pipe would be executing concurrently as much as possible.
This was done by staggering the V-pipable instructions so they
wouldn't jam up. There is actually a lot of similarity between
riscifying Pentium code and rearranging MiniForth code, except that
for the MiniForth the out-of-order arrangement was done at
compile-time by my assembler, and in the Pentium it was done at
run-time by the processor on the fly. Also, the MiniForth opcode
had 5 fields, so there were up to 5 instructions executing concurrently,
whereas the Pentium had only the U and V pipes so only 2 instructions
could execute concurrently. MiniForth assembly-language was about
an order of magnitude more difficult than Pentium assembly-language!

[Rick C]

I worked with B-splines a bit in college. I want to say they are used when you want not only line segments that have continuously changing slopes, but continuous changes in curvature between segments. It's one of those things that wouldn't seem to make a difference, but does to the eye.

I don't recall any of the math, but that's just a matter of reading some references.

I just looked up some of this and it's pretty interesting on its own.

> I'm good at high-school analytic-trigonometry, but I'm not a mathematician.
> I didn't do any kind of curve-fitting at the time.
> My program took over 30 minutes to run on as it was.
> This was using 32-bit UR/Forth on a Pentium with a DOS-extender.
> Too much floating point arithmetic would have killed the speed.
> What I did was apply a set of rules for simplifying the tiny squiggles,
> and then do the line-extension or curve-extension to connect them together.
> This worked.
> I can't guarantee that it would always work --- I think it is
> possible to confuse the rules by writing a pathological .dxf file.
> It did work for the customer-provided .dxf file though. Yay!
>
> That whole program became very complicated, although initially it seemed
> like it would be easy. It was something of a fool's errand,
> because the data was basically garbage --- computers don't come with
> mind-reading ability --- there is no way for my program to know
> what the artist with the pencil and paper intended.
> The image was a drawing of a coyote. A human viewing the result can say:
> "That does [or does not] look like a coyote."
> Unfortunately, computers don't know what coyotes look like,
> so it is difficult for the program to know if the result is good or not.

Do you know how the drawing was turned into a DXF file? Was that the output of a drawing program where the image was created, or did they start with an image of a paper drawing and scan it into a DXF file? It just seems like DXF is the wrong format, but if they wanted to carve it into metal or wood with a CNC machine, I guess I get it.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Rick C]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 12:17:35 PM UTC-4, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 6:09:05 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > What I did was apply a set of rules for simplifying the tiny squiggles,
> > and then do the line-extension or curve-extension to connect them together.
> > This worked.
>
> I was thinking about this last night and I recalled that I did not do
> a "line extension" in the sense of just extending the two line segments
> outward until they meet.
>
> What I did was to always connect the two line segments with a
> partial circle (a G02 or G03 instruction). I would calculate where
> the center point of this circle had to be so that the partial circle
> would be tangent to both line segments. This was true whether the
> line-segments were straight (G01) or if they were partial circles
> (G02 or G03).
>
> This calculation was not too difficult. It was just trigonometry.
> It did involve several floating-point calculations though,
> and on the Pentium this was slow. IIRC, the Pentium had the x87
> built-in (the 80486 had an external 80487) --- this helped the
> speed, but floating-point was still a bottleneck.

Not even trig really, geometry. The end of each line segment, even if it is a curve segment, has a slope. Define the lines perpendicular to those line segment ends and find the point of intersection. That's the center of the curve you need to smoothly connect the line segments.

I recall taking a surveying class in Community College where they brought in a member of the state board for licensing surveyors. He was an older guy who wanted to impress the young bucks that this stuff was not so simple.

The problem he presented was plotting an arc of a circle through three points. I recalled my geometry and raised my hand. The guy called on me and I described it using geometry terms, "Connect the points with line segments, draw the perpendicular bisectors and look for the intersection". The guy hesitated for a couple of seconds and said, "You are absolutely right!" What I didn't realize until some time later was that the old gent had no idea what I had actually said because I didn't use his language!!! He wasn't going to let the young bucks in the room know he didn't understand. Didn't get me any extra credit in the class though. This class was more a class in politics since the instructor was a surveyor and was mainly teaching it so he could train his own employees and get paid for it!!! So no one other than "his" guys got time on the transit, etc.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[hughag...@gmail.com]

Well, all of this talk about Testra inspired me to drive over there.
I spoke to both Tom and John Hart.

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 1:09:34 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 11:57:54 PM UTC-7, dxforth wrote:
> > On Saturday, 14 September 2019 14:32:18 UTC+10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > ...
> > > Tom and John Hart do have those records readily available.
> > > They wouldn't be so vague and inaccurate answering a direct question.
> >
> > I'm puzzled why they're giving out personal information to third parties
> > with no apparent legal right to know.
>
> They don't give out personal information to third parties.
> John Hart is careful about this --- I assume Tom Hart is too.
>
> I remember one time a hiring manager called John Hart about me,
> and she had her phone on speaker so I could listen in.
> John Hart provided the dates that I was employed, and he said:
> "Not eligible for rehire."

John Hart informed me that he never said any such thing.
Most likely this was Tom Hart on the phone.

> Juergen Pintaske is totally faking this stuff.
> The fact that he said HP-GL rather than CNC gcode is a dead giveaway.
> The languages are somewhat similar in that they both involve moving
> an instrument (colored-pen, milling-tool or laser-mirror) over a surface,
> but they are different languages.

Tom Hart's memory is very fuzzy.
It was Tom Hart, not Juergen Pintaske, who didn't remember that my
program was for CNC gcode, not HP-GL. I still don't know where
the topic of HP-GL comes from --- I'm guessing that plotters
and HP-GL are something that Testra got into after I left.

When I brought up the topic of the MiniForth processor,
Tom Hart asked: "What is the MiniForth?"
I responded: "You know, the processor! I wrote MFX,
which means: 'MiniForth X-compiler.'"
Tom Hart has no recollection of the MiniForth! For him, "the processor"
refers to the RACE that was developed about one decade after I left
Testra. What happened is that the MiniForth was developed in 1994-1995
and was built on the Lattice isp1048 PLD (now obsolete). Early in the
21st century the RACE was developed which was written in VHDL for
a Lattice FPGA. The RACE is, afaik, compatible with the MiniForth,
so MiniForth programs run on the RACE without recompilation, but can be
an order of magnitude faster (chips have advanced a lot in two decades).

Tom Hart was quite angry with me! :-(
He said: "I've been told that you are claiming to have designed
the processor, but that is really not true! You just wrote the compiler."
I responded: "You've been told? Don't believe everything that you're told!"
I have never claimed that I designed the MiniForth or the RACE hardware.
Considering that I don't know LDL, VHDL or Verilog, a claim such as that
would be a preposterous lie that would quickly be revealed to be untrue.
All that I have ever claimed was that I wrote MFX, which is true.
MFX consisted of the assembler, the simulator and the Forth compiler.

John Hart (the younger brother) had a much clearer memory of the
MiniForth and that brilliant era of Forth. He was also much more friendly.
He said that he gave no credence to what Juergen told him, that I was
telling lies about Testra and "bad-mouthing" Testra on comp.lang.forth..
He never visits comp.lang.forth though, and has no plans of doing so.
He said that comp.lang.forth is a huge waste of time --- he seemed
to be unimpressed that I'm such a fool as to waste my time with c.l.f..

He is still actively developing the RACE and will soon release a
32-bit version that is much more powerful. He has switched from
VHDL to Verilog. I think he also has (or intends to) drop Lattice
and switch to Altera or Xilinx (I was unclear on this though).
He showed me a tiny little motion-control board (13 axis, IIRC)
that cost only a few dollars to make, but had significantly more memory
and more speed than the previous board that was large and expensive.

I brought up this comment:

"Sounds like the Forth community has some problems with non team players."

John Hart thought that was pretty funny!
He is aware that he is not a "team player" either, and hasn't been for
quite some time. ;-) I told him that Stephen Pelc was crippling Forth-200x
so that all the useful features would be proprietary to MPE, and that
common Forth programmers such as himself or myself would be either
stuck with Forth-200x as perpetual students, or would have to pay for VFX.
He said: "It was the same with ANS-Forth."
I told him about how SwiftForth's SWITCH[ does a linear search and
he did a forehead-palm --- definitely an OMG! moment --- he has written
software to do fast simulation of his micro-processors.
I told him that I could defeat Forth-200x by writing Forth code that works,
while the Forth-200x committee are unable to write code that works and/or they
lie about my code (rquotations) saying that it doesn't work.
He thought that I was being utterly foolish --- ultimately, Forth-200x is
the Forth Standard, and I am a VCIW (Voice Crying In the Wilderness).
Those are my words, not his, but that was the gist of what he said
(that I'm a fool to be on c.l.f., and that I'm a fool to give away software
for free because the Forth-200x committee will just continue to say that
I'm not a Forth programmer and claim that they set the Standard for Forth).

I don't know how old these guys are.
I said earlier in this thread that they were 60 in 1994, but that was
almost certainly not true. Seeing them now, they seem to be
in their seventies, which would make them about 50 in 1994.
Testra is still active, with a new 32-bit RACE processor coming out.
The company may get sold in a few years though.

[dxforth]

On Tuesday, 17 September 2019 12:46:25 UTC+10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> ...

> I told him that Stephen Pelc was crippling Forth-200x
> so that all the useful features would be proprietary to MPE, and that
> common Forth programmers such as himself or myself would be either
> stuck with Forth-200x as perpetual students, or would have to pay for VFX.

Not sure I believe that. But if somebody beats you to the punch,
whose fault is that?

[hughag...@gmail.com]

As often happens, I don't know what you are talking about.
Who beat who to what punch?

I think Stephen Pelc wanted the fake quotations to get written in stone
in the Forth-200x Standard first, and only later on he would invent
rquotations or something similar as a proprietary closed-source
feature of VFX. He expectation was that he could wait as long as it
took to get the fake quotations into Forth-200x (it can take quite
a while to go from RfD to CfV to Standard due to the tedious
pseudo-intellectual debates that drag on) --- there was no hurry
because none of the "Forth community team players" were going to
invent rquotations or anything similar in the meantime.

I beat Stephen Pelc to the punch by implementing rquotations in 2016.
Woo hoo! Stephen Pelc didn't actually care though. The Forth-200x
committee just continued to say that rquotations don't exist and
are impossible. At EuroForth-2018 Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan
wrote their paper with the arrogant title: "Closures, the Forth Way."
Their paper had no purpose except to insult the rquotations as being
a "simple quotation-like implementation" and to blatantly lie
about the rquotation features, saying:

"the higher-order word that calls the rquotation must not use locals."

------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, in classical Forth fashion, some users explored the idea
of what outer-locals accesses can be performed with minimal effort.
In particular, Usenet user “humptydumpty” introduced rquotations, a
simple quotation-like implementation that uses return-address manipulation.
The Forth system does not know about these rquotations and therefore
treats any locals accessed inside rquotations as if they were
accessed outside. In the case of Gforth (as currently implemented)
this works as long as the locals stack is not changed in the
meantime; e.g., the higher-order word that calls the rquotation
must not use locals. There is no easy way to see whether this restriction
has been met; this is also classical Forth style, but definitely not
user-friendly. Static analysis could be used to find out in many cases
whether the restriction has been met, but that would probably require
more effort than implementing the approach presented in this paper,
while not providing as much functionality.
------------------------------------------------------------

This was in 2018, and I had posted working rquotation code in July 2016.
So, Stephen Pelc doesn't care if people beat him to the punch
by writing working Forth code that does what he says is impossible.
The Forth-200x committee just continues to say that it is impossible.
They continue two years later --- so there is no indication that they
will ever stop lying --- the fake quotations are in Forth-200x now ---
the committee is past the rubicon, so they can't turn back now and admit
that my code works, but they have to continue lying about it forever.

This is why I call the Forth-200x committee: "the Committee of Can't."
They say that Forth programming is impossible, and can't be done.
They never give up!
They continue to say that Forth programming is impossible indefinitely
(for years) after working Forth code has been shown to them publicly.

This is my code that works
(written two days after HumptyDumpty posted his prototype code):
-----------------------------------------------------------------
\ ******
\ ****** R[ ]R quotations.
\ ****** https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/3LSqmBIZuzY
\ ****** This is highly non-standard! ANS-Forth (section 3.2.3.3.) says:
\ ****** A program shall not access values on the return stack (using R@, R>, 2R@ or 2R>) that it did not place there using >R or 2>R;
\ ******

\ In the stack-picture comments, RQ is a continuation (a vector to a quotation).

\ HumptyDumpty invented rquotations --- this was very good programming --- I hadn't thought of it.
\ What I call REX0 he called RCALL --- also, he didn't have REX which I invented (this only works in VFX and SwiftForth).
\ If only REX0 is used, rquotations can be used under any ANS-Forth system (theoretically non-standard though).
\ REX is a lot more useful though because the HOF almost always needs to have locals.

\ My improved version for VFX or SwiftForth should be easy to port to other ANS-Forth systems --- any Forth system with locals.
\ Some assembly-language is required, but it is pretty straight forward.

VFX? SwiftForth? or [if]

: rexit ( -- ) rdrop ;
: (r:) ( -- rq ) r@ 5 + ; \ 5 is the size of a JMP instruction in 32-bit x86
: r[ ( -- rq ) postpone (r:) postpone ahead ; immediate
: ]r ( -- ) postpone rexit postpone then ; immediate

: rex0 ( rq -- ) >r ; \ requires the HOF to not have locals

\ REX0 is the same as EXECUTE
\ We don't use EXECUTE however because in the other version (not VFX or SwiftForth) REX0 is different.

VFX? [if]

code rex ( rq -- ) \ requires the HOF to have locals
push edi \ this is the HOF's LF which won't be used by the quotation
mov edi, 0 [edi] \ this is the parent's LF which will be used by the quotation
mov eax, ebx
mov ebx, 0 [ebp] lea ebp, w [ebp]
call eax
pop edi \ restore HOF's LF
next, end-code

[then]

SwiftForth? [if]

156 constant lf-offset \ this is the offset for the local-frame in the user-variables (ESI is the user-variable base)

code rex ( rq -- ) \ requires the HOF to have locals
lf-offset [esi] edx mov
edx push \ this is the HOF's LF which won't be used by the quotation
-4 [edx] eax mov \ this is the old ESP
0 [eax] eax mov \ this is the parent's LF which will be used by the quotation
eax lf-offset [esi] mov
ebx eax mov [drop]
eax call
lf-offset [esi] pop \ restore HOF's LF
ret end-code

[then]

[else] \ this was written by HumptyDumpty and works on gForth, SwiftForth and VFX

: rexit ( -- ) RDROP ;
: (r:) ( -- rq ) R@ false ;
: r[ ( -- rq ) postpone (r:) postpone IF ; immediate
: ]r ( -- ) postpone REXIT postpone THEN ; immediate

: rex0 ( rq -- ) >R true ; \ requires the HOF to not have locals

\ REX is not supported in HumptyDumpty's code.

[then]

\ REX is used in a HOF that has local variables.
\ REX0 is used in a HOF that does not have local variables.
\ REX0 is also used in the parent function itself, when there is no HOF used.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[dxforth]

On Wednesday, 18 September 2019 15:58:22 UTC+10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 17, 2019 at 12:11:34 AM UTC-7, dxforth wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 17 September 2019 12:46:25 UTC+10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > ...
> > > I told him that Stephen Pelc was crippling Forth-200x
> > > so that all the useful features would be proprietary to MPE, and that
> > > common Forth programmers such as himself or myself would be either
> > > stuck with Forth-200x as perpetual students, or would have to pay for VFX.
> >
> > Not sure I believe that. But if somebody beats you to the punch,
> > whose fault is that?
>
> As often happens, I don't know what you are talking about.
> Who beat who to what punch?
>
> I think Stephen Pelc wanted the fake quotations to get written in stone
> in the Forth-200x Standard first, and only later on he would invent
> rquotations or something similar as a proprietary closed-source
> feature of VFX.

> ...

> I beat Stephen Pelc to the punch by implementing rquotations in 2016.
> Woo hoo! Stephen Pelc didn't actually care though.

Well if he didn't care then perhaps there is neither an internal
conspiracy to wreck 200x, nor interest in making anything others
invent first, proprietary.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

He cared enough to standardize the Paysan-faked quotations.
Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan cared enough to lie about the
rquotations in their EuroForth-2018 paper.
That is definitely an internal conspiracy to wreck Forth-200x.

I think the fake quotations will wreck Forth-200x.
The Committee of Can't has discredited themselves completely.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

I wrote MFX, which consisted of the assembler, simulator and
Forth cross-compiler. The assembler rearranged the instructions
so they would pack into the opcodes with as few NOP instructions
as possible, while yet doing the same thing as if the instructions
were assembled one per opcode in the same order that they appeared
in the source-code. Up to 5 instructions could be packed into each
opcode, and each opcode executed in one clock-cycle. The assembler
also generated a program that ran on the host computer and simulated
the execution of the target computer program.

After I left, somebody (presumably John Hart and/or Steve Brault)
wrote a traditional on-board interactive Forth system in MFX.
I never saw this. Most likely it was pretty similar to the many
Forth system available where you have the dictionary in the
micro-controller memory and you have an outer-interpreter running
on the micro-controller itself. It would not have an assembler
available because it is not possible to write to code-memory
while the MiniForth is running. All the primitives would need
to be written ahead of time using the MFX assembler, similar to
the way that figForth required an external assembler.
This is not going to generate efficient code because it is not
meta-compiling primitives. The advantage is that it is interactive
so it allows fast testing and debugging in the usual Forth way.

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> The official answer from Tom Hart, their president,
> who agreed to have his answer to me published on clf:
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

> and what he really achieved at TESTRA??
>
> He wrote our Forth compiler for the processor
> that we implemented in a Lattice PLD.
>
> He did a good job on it,
> we are still using it with a few bug fixes and minor modifications.
>
> He had nothing to do with the processor itself,
> that was all designed by John Hart and Steve Brault.
>
> The PLD version was based upon our original Forth Engine
> done long before we ever ran across Hugh.

This is a very puzzling statement for Tom Hart to say.
For one thing, he says "compiler" rather than "cross-compiler."
For another thing, he implies by omission that I didn't write
the assembler/simulator, although I did.

I think Tom Hart's memory of the 1990s is very fuzzy!
Most likely, he is thinking about the interactive Forth compiler
that was written in MFX by somebody else after I left.
He has got his time-line screwed up!
He thinks that John Hart and Steve Brault wrote MFX in 1994 that
consisted of the assembler, simulator and Forth cross-compiler.
He thinks that I wrote the interactive Forth in MFX afterward.
The exact opposite is true!

He says that my compiler had bugs that needed to be fixed after I left.
This isn't true. The goal with MFX was that it would compiler the
motion-control program. This was accomplished while I was still there,
so there couldn't have been any bugs in MFX at the time that I left.
If there were bugs in the interactive Forth system, that isn't on me,
because that was written after I left.

In the above it seems as if Tom Hart is saying something positive about me,
that I did a "good job" on the compiler. He is not actually saying
anything positive about me though, because he is talking about the
interactive Forth compiler that was written in MFX after I left.
I don't think he actually remembers me writing MFX at all.
He similarly blamed me for failing on a program to convert AutoCAD .dxf
files into HP-GL, but I never even heard of HP-GL before. This was
most likely something that happened after I left. He is saying that
events happened in the 1990s, that actually happened in the 21st century.

I just point this out because Juergen Pintaske (or possibly
"Jurgen Pitaske" as the spelling seems to vary from day to day)
will presumably now start saying that I didn't write the
assembler/simulator for the MiniForth. I actually did though.
This is something that I'm proud of. I'm not aware of anybody else
who has ever done anything comparable.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> Dear Tom,
>
> We have not spoken for a while.
> This email is not really regarding business now, but trying to put the history right.
> Regarding Testra and regarding Hugh Aguilar.
>
> Hugh Aguilar basically says for years here on clf. that he has basically invented the MFX processor of Testra,
> And the software that basically runs the company TESTRA.

This is not true.
I already said that this is not true about two weeks prior to
Juergen Pintaske making the same accusation to Tom Hart against me again:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/9IHvRJmMn20

On Saturday, August 31, 2019 at 1:20:19 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, August 31, 2019 at 7:31:06 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> > On Saturday, 31 August 2019 03:04:11 UTC+1, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > I have been reading some "inspiring Mark Twain quotes on life"
> > > http://www.quoteambition.com/inspiring-mark-twain-quotes-life/
> > >
> > > This quote should be very inspiring for the EuroForth writers:
> > > “Never tell the truth to people who are not worthy of it.”
> >

> > Hugh Aguilar basically says for years here on clf.
> > that he has basically invented the MFX processor of Testra,
> > And the software that basically runs the company TESTRA.
> >
> > I do not mind if this were true, but I really doubt it,
>

> Jurgen Pintaske (or Pitaske, or whatever) has his facts wrong.
> MFX is not a processor. MFX is a cross-compiler that I wrote.
> MFX generates code for the MiniForth processor --- it doesn't
> "run the company" (whatever that might mean).

As a general rule of thumb, whenever a person predicates his
statements with the word "basically," that person is lying.
He is making general statements that represents what he considers
to be the "greater truth," but which are not the actual truth.

Now Juergen Pintaske continues to tell lies about Testra:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/aFAVV4JbQaM

On Sunday, October 20, 2019 at 1:20:09 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> What have you ever produced useful or contributed for others to use
> - except for your vitriol ?
>
> Thrown out of Testra twice.
> Frustrating, if you invented the best Forth Implementation as you state.
>
> But it must have been rather limited or specialized
> - as nothing came after it for the last 20 years.

This doesn't make any sense.
How could I have gotten thrown out of Testra twice?
How did I get back in the second time, if I had already been thrown out?
(perhaps he supposes that they left a window unlocked and I got in that way).

It is true that I did work at Testra on two occasions, with about an
18-month separation (during which I worked as an IBM370 assembly-language
programmer, plus a short stint at cabinet making).

I expect that Tom Hart and John Hart are going to be unamused upon
hearing Juergen state that MFX was: "rather limited or specialized."
Juergen is implying that MFX and the MiniForth/RACE processor was so
limited as to be worthless --- and yet, most or all of Testra's
products for the last 1/4 century have used this technology internally.

[Peter Forth]

Everybody in the forth community should be aware, that Pintaske
1st occupation is defamation of Forth with his lies, and Forthers in many ways
lies + insults + persecution to free forthers. Now I think this is the
absolut limit of ethics, to write to your employee to ask about a
work relation ..and then publish that letter inside a programming
forum ! This demonstrates he is a complete unethical person, he has no
limits in his mad chase for revenge.

I was chatting yesterday with some of the prestigious members of the
forth community, who also participates in CLF, and he told me about
the lies that Pintaske writes on his forth books.

He presents himself as developer of some high tech forth documents, when
everybody knows he is a total ignorant on forth, unable to write
2 lines of code that work.

This shows how desperate he is, he is a complete failure.
That bookshelf with all stolen titles of the prehistoric ages of computing
has failed completely, nobody is buying his aged papyrus and the guy
went completely mad.

[Jurgen Pitaske]

This Proven Copyright Criminal Peter Fucking FForsau ( see other post ) is active again - either drunk or his wife threw him out again, as usual.
One of the most active Forth Killers there are.
Degarding this group to - YOU SELECT YOUR OWN NAME.

WARNING: WATCH OUT FOR IDENTITY THIEVES ON CLF https://www.facebook.com/peter.forth.583
In addition to just a copyright criminal, Peter Forsau is now stealing identities as well and posts whatever he feels like.
In their name but - everybody can quite simply check this via the IP address where the post comes from.
Mental disturbance at its best, hopefully leading to walls around him soon.
As he hates the Forth Bookshelf I created so much, this link is probably the best verifier at the end of my posts
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Juergen-Pintaske/e/B00N8HVEZM

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:32:18 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> > Why your relationship ceased,
> >
> > He was difficult to work with.
> > He did fine if it was something he could do by himself without supervision,
> > but if it was a team effort, forget it.
> >
> > I let him go myself,
> > after I had given him a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.
> > He would not take any direction.
> > I scrapped the project.
>
> I never heard of HP-GL prior to seeing it now in Juergen's post.
> I looked it up this morning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP-GL
> This is apparently a graphics language for plotters.
> Testra had no involvement in building plotters; they didn't even own one.
> It is possible that Testra got involved in plotters after I left
> (plotters are an obvious application for their motion-control board),
> but I don't know anything about this. I have never worked with plotters.

Well, Tom Hart says that I got fired for failing to write a program
to convert AutoCAD .DXF files into HPGL files.
I say that I never heard of HPGL prior to reading this and I never
was involved with HPGL at Testra.
These statements are contradictory --- so, one of us is a liar!

I said elsewhere that this was just an error on Tom Hart's part.
He simply doesn't remember the 20th century very well and/or
he doesn't remember that CNC gcode and HPGL are different languages.
He knows now though because I told him when I visited, and he admitted
verbally that there was no HPGL program, and he said that he would
correct this error. He hasn't corrected the error though!
That visit was a few days prior to Sept 16, and it is now Oct 23.
The uncorrected error has morphed into a lie during this time.

I think that Tom Hart didn't want to correct the error because
doing so makes him look like a senile old fool with CRS.
So, he has decided to just let it slide. A lot of old men are
arrogant and believe that they are too important to be strictly
held accountable for telling the truth --- so when they sling
bullshit, the world of unimportant people should just accept this
as their new truth, politely forgetting the actual truth.
Tom Hart was arrogant in the 1990s too though, so it isn't age.

Tom Hart just let the lie fly, so the result is this:

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 1:20:36 PM UTC-7, Robert L. wrote:
> On 9/13/2019, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
>

> > a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.
>

> This may be a good programming puzzle.
>
> Can someone give the specifications? (Start a new thread.)

Tom Hart is totally okay with me looking like an idiot who can't write
a program to do a simple data-format conversion, which is at most
a "programming puzzle" that could be accomplished in one weekend.
He considers this to be my problem, not his, so he will ignore it.

Tom Hart drives a super-duty pickup-truck with a "Trump" bumper-sticker.
That scores a 9 on a scale of 1 to 10 on the Jackass Meter
(driving a Lexus with a "Hillary Clinton" bumper-sticker also scores a 9).
People like this believe that they are very important and that they
know what is best for the American people, so they should be in charge.
People like this routinely deal in "truthiness" --- they make statements
that aren't actually true, but which present a "greater truth" (their idea
of what is really the true true, as seen from a higher perspective).
The definition of a "jackass" is anybody who believes that he or she
has a higher perspective on the world than everybody else.

[none albert]

In article <8c66e20f-4e06-4b0f...@googlegroups.com>,

<hughag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:32:18 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
>> > Why your relationship ceased,
>> >
>> > He was difficult to work with.
>> > He did fine if it was something he could do by himself without supervision,
>> > but if it was a team effort, forget it.
>> >
>> > I let him go myself,
>> > after I had given him a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.
>> > He would not take any direction.
>> > I scrapped the project.
>>
>> I never heard of HP-GL prior to seeing it now in Juergen's post.
>> I looked it up this morning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP-GL
>> This is apparently a graphics language for plotters.
>> Testra had no involvement in building plotters; they didn't even own one.
>> It is possible that Testra got involved in plotters after I left
>> (plotters are an obvious application for their motion-control board),
>> but I don't know anything about this. I have never worked with plotters.
>
>Well, Tom Hart says that I got fired for failing to write a program
>to convert AutoCAD .DXF files into HPGL files.
>I say that I never heard of HPGL prior to reading this and I never
>was involved with HPGL at Testra.
>These statements are contradictory --- so, one of us is a liar!

Don't be so hard on yourself. Memories get blurred over time.

Groetjes Albert
--
This is the first day of the end of your life.
It may not kill you, but it does make your weaker.
If you can't beat them, too bad.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> Hi Juergen,
>
> Nice to hear from you. I was going to answer your prior Email, but got busy.
>
> Some answers regarding your questions:
> ...

> He was difficult to work with.
> He did fine if it was something he could do by himself without supervision,
> but if it was a team effort, forget it.
>
> I let him go myself,
> after I had given him a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.
> He would not take any direction.
> I scrapped the project.

Tom Hart isn't really making very much sense here.
If the project was so easy that any competent programmer could have
done it given Tom Hart's directions, why was it scrapped?
Why didn't somebody halfway smart do it? Why didn't Tom Hart do it himself?

When I visited Testra (Sept 14 or 15 of this year), John Hart told me
that after I left he attempted to upgrade my program to use
Bezier Splines, but doing so was beyond his mathematical ability,
so the program had to be scrapped. I'm not directly to be blamed
for this, because I was gone by that time.

I didn't know about Bezier Splines when I was at Testra.
I was thinking about trying polynomial approximation, but I never
got around to doing this, and it is likely beyond my mathematical ability.
Also, the Pentium was already stretched to its limits with my
current program which does a lot of trig of floating-point numbers,
so curve-fitting 1000s of points wasn't really going to happen.
Years later I read about Bezier Splines in a computer magazine and thought:
"That might have worked." I never learned anything further though.

Tom Hart's "directions" never mentioned Bezier Splines, so I'm
pretty sure that he doesn't know about Bezier Splines either.
Even if he had directed me to use Bezier Splines, there is no guarantee
that I would have succeeded. My mathematical ability isn't very strong.
Also, I was getting paid by the hour, and I was expected to spend my
time programming, but to already know how to program. All education
on programming was done on my own time, so I wasn't enthusiastic about
learning hard subjects --- I would learn easy subjects on my own for fun.

Tom Hart spends his time doing big President stuff, selling motion-control
boards, and looking down on the world from his "higher perspective."
He does little or no programming. On my first day at Testra I was told
by John Hart that his brother Tom had written a text-user-interface
code-library (similar to Turbo Vision but in UR/Forth not Turbo Pascal).
He asked me if I wanted to become an expert in using this TUI.
I said: "Nope!" He said: "Nobody ever does. Tom is the only user of it."
I never heard anything further about Tom Hart's TUI, nor did I ever
hear about Tom Hart having ever written any other software.
I considered it to be a trick question --- John Hart was just testing me
--- an affirmative answer would have indicated that I was an idiot
who doesn't know how to program but instead wants to become an expert
in user-interfaces or some other nonsense, and pretend to be a programmer.

In the old days, what is now done with Bezier Splines was done manually
using a light-table, tracing paper and French Curves (I mean the
flat plastic kind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_curve
not the femme fatale kind common in Paris). Most likely, Tom Hart
was mad because a job that was easy in pre-computer times had become
difficult on the computer, requiring a lot of math. This is why he tells
random people he meets (Juergen Pintaske) that I'm utterly incompetent and
should never be hired again for as long as I live (24 years gone by now).

I'm pretty familiar with the ANS-Forth and Forth-200x cult! LOL
I expect that, having read this, they will now begin to hee-haw about
how they are the world's experts on Bezier Splines. They might even
write a EuroForth paper on the subject (no source-code, of course).
Andrew Haley saw that I had written <SWITCH in ANS-Forth,
so he offended me by declaring himself the world's expert on the subject.
Peter Knaggs saw that I had written LIST.4TH in ANS-Forth,
so he offended me by declaring himself the world's expert on the subject.
Stephen Pelc saw that I had written STRING-STACK.4TH in ANS-Forth,
so he offended me by declaring himself the world's expert on the subject.
This is grossly offensive behavior! I find it very irksome! :-(
Now Elizabeth Rather's squirmy troll-army will undoubtedly strive to
offend me by declaring themselves the world's experts on Bezier Splines.
Why should I care though? I'm not getting paid for this stuff.

I know more about programming now than I did in the 20th century,
but no more about mathematics (actually I know less because in those
days I used algebra and trigonometry daily, but I'm out of practice now)
Could I figure out Bezier Splines now? Maybe!
Will anybody pay me to do so? Hell no!

[Cecil - k5nwa]

A long time ago I wrote some code to do Bezier Curve Fitting for a
personal project, as I remember the code itself was rather involved, but
I also remember having to do a lot of reading after buying several books
on the subject before writing one line of code. No Internet available at
the time, now all that information is available for free.

The books came quite handy later on for use with the topic of
Bresenham's algorithms for a CNC work project, I still have most of the
books.

--

Cecil - k5nwa

[hughag...@gmail.com]

When I was younger I was fascinated by mathematical topics.
I remember studying Besenham's Algorithm when I was in high-school.
I wrote a program on the C64 to do turtle-graphics in a universe
with 6 dimensions, and it displayed a 3D image (actually 2D with
perspective to a virtual horizon-point) that was a slice of the
6D object drawn (a hypercube typically). I also read math books a lot.
All of that fizzled out eventually because I really didn't have
the mathematical background to go beyond the basics of anything.

Later on, when I was employed at Testra, I became fascinated by
molecular biology and read a dozen or more books on the subject.
This was because John Hart was a big supporter of Intelligent-Design.
I actually agree with John Hart on this. The engine of evolution is
DNA (also RNA for bacteria), but DNA and RNA are too complicated to
have arisen by accident --- Francis Crick himself said that DNA
was designed in a laboratory and was not the result of random
amino acids sticking together in a "prebiotic soup" with lightning.
All of that fizzled out eventually too, because I really didn't have
the educational background to go beyond the basics of chemistry.

Eventually my fascination with Forth programming will fizzle out too,
although this is the most long-lasting fascination as I have been
doing this since I was 18 (the C64 program mentioned above was my
first non-trivial Forth program shortly after high-school graduation).

[Liang Ng]

On Saturday, 14 September 2019 10:37:12 UTC+8, dxforth wrote:
> On Saturday, 14 September 2019 02:52:06 UTC+10, Rick C wrote:
> > ...
> > I blame Forth for bringing out the worst […]
>
> You've noticed that :)
>
> Chuck described Forth as 'an amplifier' - a double-edged sword
> if ever there was. Given Forth's scope for extension and the
> means to do so who has resisted the temptation to 'play God'
> deciding what is good for all. Forth doesn't exactly encourage
> 'team players'. OTOH given enough time - who knows - it may
> also knock off the hard edges and corners of the stony Gods it
> so readily produces.

The Chinese character Dao (Tao) 道 is made of 足 (foot) at the bottom left and 首 (head) at the top right. These correspond exactly to edge and vertex in graph theory, which reverse polish notation and Forth so elegantly represent.

That is as close to God as you can get from Chinese perspective.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

Juergen Pintaske was mad because I said that the liars
Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan lied about the rquotations:

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> See his last post from Comp Lang Forth; this triggered this email to Testra:
> (I said:)
> Anton Ertl is the referee for the "academic" papers.
> He and Bernd Paysan wrote a refereed paper for EuroForth-2018
> that had no purpose except to attack the rquotations.

> They lied when they said:
> "the higher-order word that calls the rquotation must not use locals."

So the liar Juergen Pintaske lies to Tom Hart, saying that I claimed to
have designed the Testra processor although I never said any such thing:

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> Hugh Aguilar basically says for years here on clf.
> that he has basically invented the MFX processor of Testra,
> And the software that basically runs the company TESTRA.
>
> I do not mind if this were true, but I really doubt it,

Then the liar Tom Hart lies about me failing on an HPGL project
that I was never involved in and that likely happened after I left:

> Why your relationship ceased,

>
> He was difficult to work with.
> He did fine if it was something he could do by himself without supervision,
> but if it was a team effort, forget it.
>
> I let him go myself,
> after I had given him a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.
> He would not take any direction.
> I scrapped the project.

Notice the parade of liars?
Anton Ertl and Bernd Paysan say that rquotations don't work.
Juergen Pintaske says that I claimed to have invented Testra's processor.
Tom Hart says that I failed on an HPGL project that I wasn't involved in.

Then, Tom Hart becomes totally patronizing toward me:

> and what he really achieved at TESTRA??
>
> He wrote our Forth compiler for the processor
> that we implemented in a Lattice PLD.
>
> He did a good job on it,
> we are still using it with a few bug fixes and minor modifications.
>
> He had nothing to do with the processor itself,
> that was all designed by John Hart and Steve Brault.
>
> The PLD version was based upon our original Forth Engine
> done long before we ever ran across Hugh.

The way that I remember it is this:
---
John Hart and Steve Brault wrote an HDL for the Lattice 1048isp PLD.
This was prior to my starting work there, so I don't know the details.
This was John Hart's design and mostly his code.
Steve Brault wrote some tools, including CARMAP (this is the
Karnaugh Mapping tool, and I don't know why they spelled it with a 'C').
---
John Hart and Steve Brault wrote the motion-control program for the 80c320.
This was prior to my starting work there, so I don't know the details.
I also don't know anything about the PID algorithm and I have high-school
level knowledge of calculus which PID control is based on (I didn't
actually take calculus in high-school but I learned that much on my own).
---
John Hart designed the MiniForth processor for the Lattice 1048isp PLD
and he wrote the HDL code for it. Steve Brault was not involved AFAIK.
---
I wrote MFX the development system at the same time,
on John Hart's heels (he would implement features and I would support them).
MFX included the assembler, simulator and Forth cross-compiler.
---
Steve Brault ported the motion-control program to MFX at the same time,
on my heels (I would implement features and he would put them to use).
He would ask for needed features that I would provide.
He wrote a few general-purpose primitives including the 16-bit addition,
but I wrote essentially all of the general-purpose primitives.
Steve wanted to write general-purpose primitives because he thought that
I was progressing too slowly, but told John Hart that there should be a
separation of responsibilities and that only I should write the
primitives, and John Hart agreed so Steve kept his hands off MFX.
I had no involvement in the motion-control program and I never saw
the source-code for it (because they thought I would steal it).
The goal of MFX was to support the motion-control program, and the
motion-control program worked before I left, proving that MFX was bug-free.
I didn't test the motion-control program --- John Hart did.
---
After I left, somebody (John Hart, Steve Brault, or both) wrote an
interactive on-chip Forth in MFX. This allows for fast development,
but it does not include an assembler (because the MiniForth can't write
to code-memory while it is running) so it can't meta-compile primitives.
---
About a decade after I left John Hart learned VHDL and built the RACE
processor on a Lattice FPGA that is compatible with the MiniForth
so MFX could continue to be used. This was significantly faster.
---
About a year or two ago John Hart learned Verilog and built the RACE
processor using that, still on a Lattice FPGA. He either has or soon will
switch from Lattice to Xilinx or Altera because he has chilled on Lattice.

Notice that Tom Hart is not mentioned anywhere in this, because his
technical contribution was zilch. When I was writing MFX I considered
this to be pretty cool cutting-edge technology. I would expect that
most programmers would be interested and would say something like:
"I want to learn MFX assembly-language! Where is the documentation?
I will write a few simple primitives such as fetch and store
in the assembly-language to learn how the MiniForth works. Big fun!"
Tom Hart never said anything like this. He never wrote a single
assembly-language primitive, not even fetch and store for learning.
Most likely this is because he thinks that assembly-language functions
are called "primitives" because assembly-language programmers are
knuckle-dragging brutes far below his "higher perspective."
Tom Hart never got involved in the HDL programming either.
His only contribution to the design that I recall was to say that an
8032 was already on the board because it was needed to pony up the
MiniForth, so the 8032's UART could be used for serial communication
rather than building a UART inside of the Lattice PLD (problematic
because the MiniForth took up so much of the PLD's resources
that a UART couldn't also be added and the PLD still rout successfully).
Suggesting the 8032 UART usage wasn't much of a design contribution.
I'm pretty sure that John Hart already knew that the 8032 had a UART
built in, so he was already aware of that option if the PLD didn't rout.

The only technical activity that I actually saw Tom Hart doing was
fabricating boards with a soldering iron and testing them with an
oscilloscope --- this was after the R&D was done and production had begun.
AFAIK, this is the only technical skill that he has for hardware,
and his text-user-interface in UR/Forth is his only software achievement.
I remember being told after finishing MFX that I would be a lot more useful
(would actually get some hours that I could bill for) if I knew how to
fabricate and test boards --- this is why I left Testra at that time ---
I thought it was unfair that I should be criticized for not being
an electrical-fabrication technician because I signed on as a programmer.

This is what Tom Hart said about me:

> He wrote our Forth compiler for the processor
> that we implemented in a Lattice PLD.
>
> He did a good job on it,
> we are still using it with a few bug fixes and minor modifications.

This is so patronizing as to be grossly offensive.
He is implying by omission that I didn't write the assembler and simulator.
How does he know that I did a "good job" on MFX without having ever
written a single line of assembly-language code? Maybe it was a bad job!
The assembler was the difficult part of MFX because it would rearrange
the instructions to do out-of-order execution, packing as many instructions
into each opcode as possible to maximize the parallelization.
I don't think Tom Hart knows anything about MFX --- he may not know that the
MiniForth was a VLIW and had an assembly language --- he may believe that
the MiniForth was a crude Forth engine similar to the RTX-2000 of that era
that had a few Forth primitives in hardware and no assembly-language.

Also, exactly what bugs were in MFX that needed to be fixed?
I think he just made up that accusation because, from his
"higher perspective," he has come to believe that all programs have bugs.

Tom Hart can take his patronizing compliment that I did a "good job"
and shove it up his ass. I don't ask Tom Hart to compliment me.
I only ask Tom Hart to stop lying about the HPGL project.
There was no HPGL project! Tom Hart needs to stop lying about this.
That is all that I ask of Tom Hart.
That is all that the world needs from Tom Hart. Nothing else matters.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 10:38:44 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> There are probably hundreds or thousands of Forthers in the world
> who do not understand what is happening in this group.
>
> Now they have the context and from the Horses Mouth.
> And they will have this here for the many years to come.

Juergen Pintaske now says that I got fired for incompetence from Testra
after writing MFX. This is indirectly an attack on Testra because
it implies that MFX didn't work, which implies that the MiniForth/RACE
processor doesn't work either. How could the processor be useful in any way
if the compiler was written by an incompetent who got fired afterward?

Cui bene?
Who benefits from the "hundreds or thousands of Forthers in the world"
believing that Testra's Forth processor doesn't work and isn't useful?

Stephen Pelc sells boards running Forth, typically based on the ARM.
Stephen Pelc also says this on his website:
--------------------------------------------
The RTXcore is a VHDL clean-room implementation of the
Intersil RTX-2000 for FPGAs. It runs the same instruction set,
but twice as fast on a Xilinx Spartan. An an on-chip UART as well as
the original peripherals are provided.
--------------------------------------------

Stephen Pelc wants the Forthers of the world to believe that he is
the master of soft-core Forth processors. He did a
"clean-room implementation of the Intersil RTX-2000," meaning that
he didn't pay Intersil for their design. He got the R&D done for free
using the same "clean-room implementation" technique that Red China uses.
The RTX-2000 was actually not competitive with the MiniForth in 1994,
and Stephen Pelc's "twice as fast" version isn't competitive with the
RACE today, which is several times faster than the MiniForth of 1994.
Stephen Pelc can't compete with Testra on a technical basis, so he
instead strives to drag Testra through the mud on comp.lang.forth.

Juergen Pintaske is supposedly an ex-employee of Stephen Pelc,
yet here he is making an attack on Testra that only benefits
Stephen Pelc (benefits Elizabeth Rather slightly too, but not
as much because Forth Inc. doesn't sell Forth boards or chips).

I think that Juergen Pintaske is still an employee of Stephen Pelc.
Juergen Pintaske no longer strives to make MPE look good,
which didn't work very well because Juergen knew nothing about Forth.
Instead, Juergen Pintaske's job is to attack Stephen Pelc's
competition, which primarily includes Testra.

Tom Hart is very old and he has serious mental problems.
His memory of the 20th century is very fuzzy! He can't remember
the difference between CNC gcode and HPGL, and he is arrogant
enough to think that the difference is unimportant when you consider
what an important person he is (no, it actually does make a difference).
He asked me: "What is the MiniForth?" He should remember that!
Tom Hart also has serious paranoia issues. He allowed Juergen Pintaske
to convince him that I was on comp.lang.forth claiming to have
designed Testra's processor. I never said any such thing! Tom Hart
could have verified this with a few minutes of research, or he could
have just asked me. Instead, Tom Hart gets riled up and fires off an
attack against me on comp.lang.forth in which he claims that I'm
utterly incompetent, don't take direction, and not qualified for any job.

Juergen Pintaske took advantage of a foggy old man nearly 80 years old.
That was uncool!
Ultimately though, I think that Stephen Pelc is the mastermind of this
attack --- quietly operating in the background --- hoping that when
the dust clears he will be recognized as the master of soft-core Forth
processors with his clean-room implementation of the RTX-2000.

That would be a pretty sad outcome.
In 1994 I mentioned the RTX-2000 as a possible choice for the
motion-control board, rather than build a custom processor.
This suggestion was nixed. John Hart told me that the RTX-2000
was not fast enough, and it was over-priced, and there was no way
to prevent reverse-engineering of the firmware by Red China.
The RTX-2000 was roughly comparable to the MC68000 --- the MC68000
was actually obsolete in 1994 though --- the RTX-2000 was obsolete too.
The competitor in the laser-etching business was using an MC68000
board programmed in C. The MiniForth board cost less and was also
significantly faster, so that really killed the competition.

So, Tom Hart shot himself in the foot.
I'm intrinsically linked to the Testra processor because I wrote MFX,
the assembler/simulator and Forth cross-compiler that continues
to be used today on the RACE. When Tom Hart says that I'm incompetent,
he indirectly takes a shot at his own processor. Tom Hart tried to
make a subtle distinction, saying that I did a "good job" on the
Forth compiler (implying by omission that I didn't write the
assembler and simulator), but this was just patronizing nonsense.
The take-away message of his attack was that I'm incompetent.
This was really dumb!
I haven't asked Tom Hart for a job reference in over 20 years.
I have been ignoring Tom Hart for over 20 years.
This was a totally unprovoked attack on me.
He could have just shut the hell up --- that would have been wise.

From a practical perspective, none of this matters.
There aren't "hundreds or thousands of Forthers in the world."
In 1994 there was a mass exodus of UR/Forth programmers who switched
over to C programming. UR/Forth had been the dominant Forth system,
so this mass exodus resulted in a loss of maybe 90% of all Forthers.
Now we have maybe 20 Forthers on the Forth-200x mailing list,
and all of them are idiots (Alex McDonald, etc.) who spend their time
discussing recognizers and other nonsense that has nothing to do with
Forth programming. Nobody is actually writing Forth programs.
ANS-Forth killed Forth --- there are no Forth jobs --- not since 1994.

I've been reading about the Donner Party, which is a case-study in
how to screw up as badly as it is possible to screw up.
The Forth community has descended to a similar situation.
The Forthers now kill the other Forthers and eat them.
Juergen Pintaske represents the final hate-filled face of Forth.
I'm similar to the Indians Lewis and Salvatore who refused to commit
cannibalism because of their honor, then they got murdered and eaten.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

This is worthwhile thread to read:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/y96tQf_iOSk%5B1-25%5D

When I visited Testra, Tom Hart was very mad at me.
He said that he had been told (by Juergen Pintaske) that I was
"bad-mouthing Testra and telling a lot of lies on comp.lang.forth
about Testra." Perhaps Tom Hart read the above mentioned thread
and found this quote from me:

On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 7:43:42 AM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 2:43:58 AM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
> > Is there anyone in the Forth community you admire? So much bile.
>
> I was impressed by the quality of UR/Forth.
> UR/Forth worked okay for writing MFX with only a few flaws,
> and I'm not aware of any other Forth that would have been adequate.
> So I admire Ray Duncan.
>
> I was impressed by the MiniForth design.
> This was the only Forth processor developed in the 20th century
> by anybody other than Charles Moore.
> This continues to be the only VLIW Forth processor ever developed.
> So I admire John Hart.
>
> I was impressed by the design of Forth.
> So I admire Charles Moore.

Perhaps Tom Hart got mad because he assumed that a big President
such as himself should get big admiration from a lowly programmer
such as myself.
Yet I didn't mention him at all! I only mentioned his younger brother!

Anyway, here we still are:

[Gerry Jackson]

Yes unfortunately, boring everybody who reads this crap. What makes you
think that anybody gives a shit about your relations with Testra.

>
> On Wednesday, October 30, 2019 at 8:58:24 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Tom Hart can take his patronizing compliment that I did a "good job"
>> and shove it up his ass. I don't ask Tom Hart to compliment me.
>> I only ask Tom Hart to stop lying about the HPGL project.
>> There was no HPGL project! Tom Hart needs to stop lying about this.
>> That is all that I ask of Tom Hart.
>> That is all that the world needs from Tom Hart. Nothing else matters.

--
Gerry

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 3:27:51 PM UTC-7, Gerry Jackson wrote:
> On 10/11/2019 22:10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Anyway, here we still are:
>
> Yes unfortunately, boring everybody who reads this crap. What makes you
> think that anybody gives a shit about your relations with Testra.

Stephen Pelc's employee Juergen Pintaske apparently does.
He went to a lot of effort to attack me, and attack Testra indirectly.
He continues to say that I was fired for incompetence and
that MFX doesn't work, and imply that the Testra processor doesn't
work either --- this is what Stephen Pelc pays him to do.

[Rick C]

You might consider doing what the rest of us do about Juergen, ignore him when he is ranting.

--

Rick C.

--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Jurgen Pitaske]

Learn reading - if you can
and read your own posts and what Tom, one of the directors of Testra stated about you.

And stop your lies about visiting Testra again AFTER Tom send his kind email to me that I posted here. See at the beginning of this post.

They would have thrown you out at the entrance after having read what you post here about TOM AND ABOUT TESTRA.

And not just in this post here but everywhere on clf
- and probably elsewhere.

DISGUSTING

I keep Tom uptodated about your lies about Testra here
- up to him to call the police when suitable as he has your contact details.

And by the way - you should consider your importance on this planet and here in clf:

1 of 6 800 000 000 so a lot less than 1 ppb
- and probably one of 100 posters here on CLF.

My posts are mostly for the quiet community
- as we all here know about your vitriol.


As you know very well the following are again your usual lies:

> Stephen Pelc's employee Juergen Pintaske apparently does.

BULLSHIT

> He went to a lot of effort to attack me, and attack Testra indirectly.

BULLSHIT - I warned you a few times but did not care
- so you can read your time at Testra for the rest of your life.

> He continues to say that I was fired for incompetence and
> that MFX doesn't work, and imply that the Testra processor doesn't
> work either ---

BULLSHIT again

this is what Stephen Pelc pays him to do.

BULLSHIT AGAIN - I stopped consulting for MPE 6 months ago - actually he calmed me down quite a few times after you threw your vitriol around again.

NOW I AM FREE AND CAN CALL YOU THE ARSEHOLE that you are.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> Hi Juergen,
>
> Nice to hear from you. I was going to answer your prior Email, but got busy.

> ...

> He did fine if it was something he could do by himself without supervision,
> but if it was a team effort, forget it.
>
> I let him go myself,
> after I had given him a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.
> He would not take any direction.
> I scrapped the project.

Today is Thanksgiving. Tom Hart can be thankful that he has a new BFF:
Juergen Pintaske!
Tom Hart always looked down on me as a mere programmer, far below
the level of a big President such as himself.
He doesn't think he has any peers, and certainly not a mere programmer.
But now Tom Hart has found somebody that he considers to be his peer!
Tom Hart and Juergen Pintaske put their heads together to judge me.

Tom Hart is a liar. For twenty years he has been saying about me:

"He would not take any direction."

He is trying to portray me as a stupid little trainee who needs to be
micro-managed on a day-to-day basis, and still fails due to an inability
to take direction. This isn't true at all. What I remember the most
about working at Testra is that I never got any direction at all.
I was really on my own figuring out how to get this stuff working.

This is a subjective call. Was I a trainee unable to take direction?
Or was Tom Hart just embarrassed that Testra needed outside help
to write the assembler, so he needed to discredit me so that he could
claim that the assembler was written in-house?
Now however, I have busted Tom Hart on telling a lie that is not
subjective at all. There either was or was not an HPGL project.
This is not a subjective distinction. The truth is that there was no
HPGL project --- Tom Hart has been caught lying about something that
is easily disproved (John Hart is honest, so he will say that
there was no HPGL project --- just ask John Hart for the truth).

I intend to call Tom Hart a liar every day for the rest of his life.
Thanksgiving Day is not an exception.

Note that BFF means: "best friend forever."
Juergen Pintaske is now inextricably linked to Tom Hart.
Here is a typical example of Tom Hart's BFF on the warpath:

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 1:28:39 PM UTC-7, JUERGEN wrote:
> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 9:11:29 PM UTC+1, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > You are filled with hate toward my disambiguifiers --- how foolish
> > will you appear when your employer accepts the disambiguifiers? ---
> > I think that it is inevitable that Stephen Pelc will eventually accept
> > the disambiguifiers, because arguing in favor of ambiguity
> > is a not going to continue to work forever.
>
> Forth Killer at work again.
> I give a fuck about your disambiguifiers - as I give a fuck about
> any of your work you are claiming you have done. It stinks
> and it always will. You might flavour it - but shit stays shit.
> You give a shit about anybody who does not like you -
> which is probably 200% of the Forth community. Piss off and get out of
> my thread - who gives you the right to comment here.
> You are drunk again or using other drugs.
>
> Never looked at it never will. Why waste my time with it.
> An arshole is an arshole - and only shit comes out of it
> as you have proven for the last x years

[hughag...@gmail.com]

Here is an interesting quote from Zbig:

On Friday, December 13, 2019 at 5:45:49 AM UTC-7, Zbig wrote:
> We've got here (in Poland) a smartass businessman - Mr. Filipiak -
> who created a saying:
> "every specialist programmer can be replaced with finite number of students".
> So this is probably approach of most "industry" of today:
> easily replaceable programmers - "the gear is here, why not use it",
> quality of software doesn't matter that much anymore.
> If anything goes wrong - never mind, "online updates" are available
> (how many times each week our Android phones are "updating"
> various pieces of software?) etc. etc.

This Mr. Filipiak seems to be very similar to Tom Hart!

Tom Hart believed that every specialist (I was a specialist in MFX
because I wrote MFX) can be replaced by a finite number of students.
Tom Hart's mind (in 1994) was stuck in the late 1980s when there
were a lot of Forth programmers and all of them were enthusiastic
about gaining employment in Forth so they could do work they enjoyed
rather than accept the drudgery of C programming or ditch digging.
In 1994 however, ANS-Forth killed Forth for good, and all of those
enthusiastic Forth programmers just switched to C programming.
Tom Hart didn't notice that the rug had been pulled out from under him.

I still think that Juergen Pintaske continues to be employed by MPE
but now, instead of overtly promoting VFX (he was terrible at this
because he knew nothing about Forth programming) Juergen covertly
attacks MPE's enemies --- this mostly means Testra.
The plan is that Tom Hart will sell the MiniForth/RACE outright to
Stephen Pelc. John Hart told me during my visit that Testra was
going to be sold in the near future. MPE is the only candidate
that I can think of for buying Testra --- also, this is the only
reason why Tom Hart would have been in communication with MPE,
which is how he met his new BFF Juergen Pintaske.

Tom Hart said:
"Sounds like the Forth community has some problems with non team players."

He is obviously brown-nosing Stephen Pelc --- what other team is there?

The plan of MPE buying Testra isn't going to work very well.
There was no documentation for the MiniForth when I wrote MFX
(I relied on emails from John Hart for a description of the ISA,
and the design changed day by day which is why I had my DUJOUR.4TH file
for the changeable aspects). There is no documentation for the ISA
except for the comments in my source-code (mostly in DUJOUR.4TH).
Before I left, I was asked to write some documentation for MFX,
which I did. I wrote a document (using Borland Sprint), but it did not
describe the ISA. It gave a brief description of using the assembler,
but I primarily focused on the high-level Forth features --- this was
because I expected that any new employee would struggle enough to
learn the Forth, but would have no hope of learning the assembly-language.
This document isn't going to be adequate for Stephen Pelc to become
an expert in MFX assembly-language. Also, Stephen Pelc doesn't know
what a VLIW is --- the assembler is much more complicated than any
assembler for mundane processors such as the ARM Cortex or x86.
In a VLIW, the assembler does the rearrangement of instructions,
whereas in the x86 the out-of-order execution is arranged internally
by the processor itself, but the assembler is pretty much the same
as it was in the old days (of the 8086) when there was no out-of-order
execution but the instructions just executed sequentially with no
parallelization at all. Figuring out how concurrent execution of
instructions worked was difficult for me, and I'm pretty sure this
is beyond Stephen Pelc's talent level even when he gets to look at
the source-code for my assembler.
Stephen Pelc will give Tom Hart money, but not get any positive results.
The end result is that John Hart will take the MiniForth/RACE to
the grave with him, and the only thing that Tom Hart will leave
to the world will be a super-duty truck with a 'Trump' bumper-sticker
(given Stephen Pelc's money he might upgrade to an actual monster-truck
with ten-foot-tall knobby tires capable of crushing a Prius like a bug).

As a final note, let me comment that I have noticed a change over the years.
In the old days, America was leading the world in programming innovation.
Over time however, America's innovation-engine ran out of steam.
In the 21st century, most innovation comes from foreign countries
(Lua from Brasil, Ruby from Japan, Erlang from Sweden, etc.).
I'm not aware of any innovation coming from Poland --- this is likely
due to a rise of American-style MBA-types such as this Mr. Filipiak ---
if the Poles cut the chain binding their ankles to this boat-anchor,
they should be able to sail forward into the future too!

Ultimately, innovation is accomplished by a smart programmer working alone.
There is no other way.

[Zbig]

> This Mr. Filipiak seems to be very similar to Tom Hart!

Do you think so? Does Mr. Hart drive his own R-R? OK, actually Mr. Filipiak doesn't drive his Rolls neither - of course his personal driver drives it.

The bloke made really big money doing business with government (as usual in such cases): https://www.comarch.pl/o-firmie/zarzad/prof-janusz-filipiak/

> I'm not aware of any innovation coming from Poland --- this is likely
> due to a rise of American-style MBA-types such as this Mr. Filipiak ---
> if the Poles cut the chain binding their ankles to this boat-anchor,
> they should be able to sail forward into the future too!

Unfortunately, so far the last really spectacular polish invention regarding informatics area was personal computer (long before the term itself had been invented). It looked like this:
http://www.zenker.poznan.pl/k-202/grafika/k-202-widok.jpg
OK, "formally" it was minicomputer, not "micro-" - the microprocessors haven't been invented yet at that time, right?
Handful of basic facts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-202

Could be nice target for Forth, couldn't it?

Since that time, for reasons obvious to us all here - and probably less obvious elsewhere - not that much happened. And because polish software industry has been "filipiakized" - they even attract "cheap programming force" from Ukraine etc. - I'm not sure is it going to change anytime soon.

OK, polish game "The Witcher" became kind of blockbuster; somewhat other thing than the ones you mentioned, but still. ;)

[Jurgen Pitaske]

Thanks for reminding me that I should not forget to post
the link and the list of Special Forth Presents this year,
If there are still some little presents missing under the Christmas Tree…

The current Forth Bookshelf can be found at
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Juergen-Pintaske/e/B00N8HVEZM

1 Charles Moore - Forth - The Early Years: Background information about the beginnings of this Computer Language
2 Charles Moore - Programming A Problem Oriented Language: Forth - how the internals work
3 Leo Brodie - Starting Forth -The Classic
4 Leo Wong – Juergen Pintaske – Stephen Pelc FORTH LITE TUTORIAL: Code tested with free MPE VFX Forth, SwiftForth and Gforth or else
5 Juergen Pintaske – A START WITH FORTH - Bits to Bites Collection – 12 Words to start, then 35 Words, Javascript Forth on the Web, more
6 Stephen Pelc - Programming Forth: Version July 2016
7 Brad Rodriguez - Moving Forth / TTL CPU / B.Y.O. Assembler
8 Tim Hentlass - Real Time Forth

9 Chen-Hanson Ting - Footsteps In An Empty Valley issue 3
10 Chen-Hanson Ting - Zen and the Forth Language: EFORTH for the MSP430G2552 from Texas Instruments
11 Chen-Hanson Ting - eForth and Zen - 3rd Edition 2017: with 32-bit 86eForth v5.2 for Visual Studio 2015
12 Chen-Hanson Ting - eForth Overview
13 Chen-Hanson Ting - FIG-Forth Manual Document /Test in 1802 IP
14 Chen-Hanson Ting - EP32 RISC Processor IP: Description and Implementation into FPGA – ASIC tested by NASA
15 Chen-Hanson Ting – Irriducible Complexity
16 Chen-Hanson Ting - Arduino controlled by eForth

17 Burkhard Kainka - Learning Programming with MyCo: Learning Programming easily - independent of a PC (Forth code to follow soon)
18 Burkhard Kainka - BBC Micro:bit: Tests Tricks Secrets Code, Additional MicroBit information when running the Mecrisp Package
19 Burkhard Kainka – Thomas Baum – Web Programming ATYTINY13

[Jurgen Pitaske]

On Thursday, 28 November 2019 18:21:27 UTC, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

[Jurgen Pitaske]

On Monday, 11 November 2019 04:39:56 UTC, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

Just going through the bullshit you are posting - a magnific bunch of lies as usual:

> Stephen Pelc's employee Juergen Pintaske apparently does.

Lie number 1 - I have never been an employee of MPE - I worked as consultant in the past.
Even after 5 years you cannot grasp it. Showing your reading deficit.

> He went to a lot of effort to attack me, and attack Testra indirectly.

Lie number 2: I just threw the shit you had posted back at you.

. and attack Testra indirectly.

Lie number 3: Testra quite nicely clarified the stuff you posted as Glorified Time at Testra. I am rather grateful Testra did this. Read the email to me higher up in this thread.

> He continues to say that I was fired for incompetence and

Lie number 4: Testra clearly stated "we had to let him go". Go up in this post and read what Testra sent me.

> that MFX doesn't work, and imply that the Testra processor doesn't
> work either

Lie number 5: I have no clue what your MFX does - and actually do not care.

--- this is what Stephen Pelc pays him to do.

Lie number 6: as styated above more bullshit from you.

You should not make it too obvious that you have been fired from your last job recently asd have no frieds to talk to or talk with - only option: have to post your shit here.

6 lies in five lines of posting - definitely a new record.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, December 14, 2019 at 9:10:18 AM UTC-7, Zbig wrote:
> > This Mr. Filipiak seems to be very similar to Tom Hart!
>
> Do you think so? Does Mr. Hart drive his own R-R? OK, actually Mr. Filipiak doesn't drive his Rolls neither - of course his personal driver drives it.
>
> The bloke made really big money doing business with government (as usual in such cases): https://www.comarch.pl/o-firmie/zarzad/prof-janusz-filipiak/

> ...

> Since that time, for reasons obvious to us all here -
> and probably less obvious elsewhere - not that much happened.
> And because polish software industry has been "filipiakized" -
> they even attract "cheap programming force" from Ukraine etc. -
> I'm not sure is it going to change anytime soon.

Tom Hart drives a over-sized pickup truck with a "Trump" bumper-sticker.
Maybe he will upgrade to a Rolls Royce if his buddy Donald hooks him up
with a big government contract. Loyalty has its perks! ;-)

Anyway, communism is corruption.
There isn't going to be any innovation under communism.
Like any slave, you get assigned to a job and you do what you are told.
A "non team player" like me would get a bullet in the back of the head.

Fascism (called "corporatism" by Mussolino) is corruption too, though.
Fascism is all about state-mandated monopolies.
Poland has Janusz Filipiak and America has Bill Gates. People tend to
believe that Windows just arose naturally, like a force of nature,
but this isn't true --- the federal government gave MicroSoft a
monopoly in the federal bureaucracy and this turned MicroSoft into
an 800-pound gorilla, so it was able dominate in the civilian world too,
despite its abysmal quality --- this is how the bad becomes normal.

Communism and fascism are "opposames" --- the libertarians use
one word "statism" for both --- the actual result is the same either way.
This is based on Hegelian philosophy that teaches that there is a
thesis and an antithesis, and they combine to form the synthesis.
In WWII we had the communists versus the fascists, which were supposed
to be exact opposites, so people could chose one side or the other
and believe that they were good and the other side was bad.
This is a "managed conflict" in which a false dichotomy is presented
and the people believe they are exercising their "free will" to chose
one side or the other, but they aren't --- it is the same either way.
The synthesis was the New World Order --- it didn't actually matter
which side "won" WWII because the New World Order was going to be
the synthesis either way.

The "opposame" concept is why we often see supposed opposites
working together, despite being theoretic enemies, or individuals
switching sides with little or no disruption in their evil activities.
For example, in the early post-WWII period, Israel bought 100% of
their weapons from Odessa (the organization of former SS officers),
the weapons being left-overs from the war (plenty of weapons!).
It would seem that Israel and the SS would be natural enemies who
would hate each other forever, but they easily learned to get along
like brothers after 1947 --- this was because they were the same
at heart --- Israel was a continuation of Nazi philosophy except that
they oppressed the Palestinians, but the philosophy was of oppression
so they were alike and in many cases were actually the same people.

Anyway, I wish the best for Poles --- hopefully they can cut the
chains that bind them to a statist system, to become free.
Hopefully Americans can do the same!

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> Dear Tom,
>
> We have not spoken for a while.
> This email is not really regarding business now, but trying to put the history right.
> Regarding Testra and regarding Hugh Aguilar.

When I visited, I said to Tom Hart:
"You do know that Juergen Pintaske got fired from MPE, right?"
Tom Hart replied: "Juergen wasn't fired from MPE."

At the time, I interpreted this to mean that Juergen had not been fired,
but had just quit MPE amiably to move onto some other sales job.
Later on I realized that a different interpretation is that
Juergen Pintaske is still employed by MPE.

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 11:57:54 PM UTC-7, dxforth wrote:
> I'm puzzled why they're giving out personal information to third parties
> with no apparent legal right to know.

I think that Stephen Pelc contacted Tom Hart and said that he is
interested in buying Testra, including the MiniForth/RACE processor.
It was at this time that Tom Hart met Juergen Pintaske.
Juergen said: "This email is not really regarding business now..."
This purchase of Testra by MPE is the "business now" referred to above.
Tom Hart is highly enthusiastic about cashing out finally, so he is
willing to do what Juergen Pintaske tells him to do --- denounce me.
Tom Hart is a Judas --- he betrays me for the promise of money.

What is sad about this is that there is almost zero chance that
Stephen Pelc is going to buy Testra, because the assembler doesn't have
any documentation. The assembly-language is also about 4* more difficult
than ordinary assembly-languages because you have to be aware of the
parallelization, there are no jump or branch instructions except NXT,
and there are no addressing modes other than inherent.
This is the deep end of the pool --- Stephen Pelc stays in the kiddie pool.
So Tom Hart the Judas sold me out, and he didn't even get his 30 denarii.

Actually, Tom Hart was betraying me 20 years ago too though.
He would say that he fired me: "He would not take any direction."
He was trying to present me as a stupid little trainee who needs
to be micro-managed day-by-day and still fails.
He did this so he could pretend that he wrote the assembler himself.

Ironically, Stephen Pelc also thinks that I'm a stupid little trainee:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/T-yYkpVwYew

On Monday, October 29, 2018 at 11:39:35 AM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 2, 2015 at 10:07:52 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 13:40:52 -0700 (PDT), hughag...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> > >So how do you write SYNONYM so that it can make a synonym
> > >of an immediate word?
> >
> > The VFX source code is:
> >
> > : SynComp, \ xt --
> > \ Compile a child of SYNONYM.
> > >body @ compile,
> > ;
> >
> > : Synonym \ "<new-name>" "<curdef>" --
> > \ *G Create a new definition which redirects to an existing one.
> > \ ** Normal dictionary searches for *\i{<new-name>} will return
> > \ ** the xt of *\i{<curdef>}.
> > create
> > hide ' reveal dup , immediate?
> > if immediate endif
> > ['] SynComp, set-compiler
> > $010 latest set-bit \ set header's alias bit
> > interp>
> > @ execute
> > ;
> >
> > For some words you may have to RTFM.
> >
> > Stephen
>
> Cynical readers will notice that this code is not ANS-Forth.
> When Stephen Pelc (Forth-200x committee member) tells the plebian
> (Hugh Aguilar) to RTFM (Read The F'ing Manual), he is referring to
> the VFX manual. All of that code is VFX-specific. Stephen Pelc is trying
> to trap the VFX users into relying on vendor-specific code so they
> won't be able to port their code to competitor's ANS-Forth compilers ---
> vendor lock-in, of course, is what the standard is supposed to prevent!
>
> Alert readers will also notice this code has a bug in it.
> If SYNONYM is used to make a synonym of a word defined with CREATE
> and then >BODY is used on the synonym, >BODY will not return the
> body-address of the original word. I have read on comp.lang.forth
> that VFX has a new version that fixes this bug. I haven't bothered
> to download the new version however, so I haven't verified this.
> The more important problem is that Stephen Pelc is refusing to acknowledge
> the existence of the disambiguifiers and he is insisting that a word
> such as SYNONYM "requires carnal knowledge."

So, Stephen Pelc is insulting me by saying: "RTFM."
But now Stephen Pelc is thwarted in his attempt to buy Testra
and their processor because I didn't write a manual for him to read.
Well, I did write a manual, but it was for high-level Forth programming;
it didn't document the assembler except to say look in the DUJOUR.4TH file
for comments describing each instruction. Stephen Pelc won't succeed.

Well, if Stephen Pelc declines to buy Testra, maybe Janusz Filipiak
will buy Testra --- he can replace the specialist (me) with
a finite number of students (everybody on comp.lang.forth).

Janusz Filipiak's idea reminds me of a Pyramid Scheme --- this would work
if there were an infinite supply of investors, so nobody ever ends up
on the bottom level of the pyramid, but the pyramid just keeps growing
wider and wider. Unfortunately, there are a finite supply of investors.
Pretty soon, there are no more investors joining, and so the bottom-level
investors lose their investments. The same thing happens with Filipiak's
pyramid. In his finite number of students there are one or two that are
smart enough to become specialists, but then they demand a raise in pay,
so they get replaced by a finite number of students --- this new group
can't include anybody from the first group --- pretty soon, Filipiak
runs out of students joining, so he has to look for them in the Ukraine,
and eventually he ends up in Ecuador asking the headhunters in the jungle
if they would like to be Forth students (they kill him and shrink his head).

[dxforth]

Why write a gossip column for free, when you could make money
out of it.

https://www.subscribetoday.com.au/new-idea/

Admittedly the magazine should have been called 'No Idea' but
I guess it might have given the game away.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 3:27:51 PM UTC-7, Gerry Jackson wrote:

> On 10/11/2019 22:10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Anyway, here we still are:
>
> Yes unfortunately, boring everybody who reads this crap. What makes you
> think that anybody gives a shit about your relations with Testra.

You're a vulgar little prick, aren't you?
Have you been taking lessons from Juergen Pintaski?

I think that everybody in the ANS-Forth cult does care.
This is why they began attacking me in 2009, and continue today.
Elizabeth Rather saw me as a representative of Testra, and Testra
is the competition, so she and her cult attacked me.

You continue to attack me, such as here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/y96tQf_iOSk%5B1-25%5D
Most of your attacks are just bizarre idiocy, such as saying that
because I wrote SET-CONTEXT PUSH-CONTEXT etc., this is "more proof"
that I don't know what SET-ORDER does. You are attacking me on
Elizabeth Rather's orders, so she apparently still does care.

Now however, Tom Hart says:
"Sounds like the Forth community has some problems with non team players."

Apparently, Tom Hart has decided rather belatedly to get on his knees
for Elizabeth Rather and Stephen Pelc, so he can become a team player.
I think that Tom Hart will make a great team player!
Joining the ANS-Forth cult is all about being a liar, so it is a natural fit.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

Juergen Pintaske told a big lie about MFX to Tom Hart to get him riled up,
and this is the same lie that he has been telling for quite some time:

On Saturday, August 31, 2019 at 1:20:19 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Saturday, August 31, 2019 at 7:31:06 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> > Hugh Aguilar basically says for years here on clf.
> > that he has basically invented the MFX processor of Testra,
> > And the software that basically runs the company TESTRA.
> >
> > I do not mind if this were true, but I really doubt it,
>

> Jurgen Pintaske (or Pitaske, or whatever) has his facts wrong.
> MFX is not a processor. MFX is a cross-compiler that I wrote.
> MFX generates code for the MiniForth processor --- it doesn't
> "run the company" (whatever that might mean).

Now we have this humorous statement:

On Saturday, December 14, 2019 at 11:20:27 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> Lie number 5: I have no clue what your MFX does - and actually do not care.

He doesn't know what MFX does, and he doesn't care --- but he knows that
Tom Hart does care, so he uses MFX as the basis for his lies about me
to get Tom Hart riled up against me.

Juergen Pintaske is a pig! This should be obvious given two minutes of
interaction with him. The fact that Tom Hart totally accepts Juergen's lies
without doing any checking, and treats Juergen as his peer, says quite a lot
about Tom Hart.

Also, the fact that Stephen Pelc employed Juergen as the MPE salesman
for a long time, says quite a lot about Stephen Pelc.
I think that Juergen is still employed by Stephen Pelc.
If Juergen is not employed by Stephen Pelc, he didn't mention this to
Tom Hart --- he was representing himself as an employee of MPE when he
sent that email to Tom Hart, which is why Tom Hart responded --- and
Stephen Pelc knows about this, but doesn't seem to be bothered by it.

As I said before:

[Zbig]

> Janusz Filipiak's idea reminds me of a Pyramid Scheme --- this would work
> if there were an infinite supply of investors, so nobody ever ends up
> on the bottom level of the pyramid, but the pyramid just keeps growing
> wider and wider. Unfortunately, there are a finite supply of investors.

It's not "pyramid scheme" at all.

That (finite number of) students won't hire another students; they are doomed to earn little to mediocre money (they can get "replaced" otherwise...) therefore to stay employees forever. Programming laborers.
I didn't have a contact to Indian programmers, but I read that (in general) they are like this: cheap, but don't expect too much quality for little money you are going to pay them. Of course some good specialist also can be found, as everywhere (but they won't be cheap).

[hughag...@gmail.com]

You didn't understand my analogy to a pyramid scheme!

Lets say that 10% of the students are smart enough to become specialists.
So Filipiak fires his specialist for demanding too much money,
and he replaces him with 10 students. Some time passes and one student
rises up as a competent programmer and the other 9 are incompetent so
they either get fired or they get simple tasks that they can handle.
The one smart student demands higher pay because he is a specialist now.
Filipiak fires him and replaces him with 10 students...
It is a pyramid scheme because it would work if there were an infinite
number of students to hire, but there isn't due to the fact that the
students who have been hired in the past and fired can't be hired again.
So, Filipiak runs out of students and has to look further afield for
more students --- the Ukraine --- but, the further afield he looks the
lower the quality gets, so the percentage drops from 10% to 5% and he has
to hire 20 students to replace the specialist rather than just 10.
Like all pyramid schemes it is not a long term plan. It will fail.
Filipiak doesn't care because he has government contracts so he is making
a lot of money --- when the pyramid scheme fails he moves out of Poland,
buys a house on the French Riviera, and calls the scheme a success.

For Tom Hart, failure came quickly.
His mind was stuck in the 1980s when there were a lot of young eager
Forth students begging for jobs and willing to work for $10/hour.
He assumed that it would be an easy to find students to replace me,
and assuming that some reasonable percentage were smart he could keep them
and get as much work out of them as possible until they demanded more
money because they had become specialists, at which time he would fire
them and hire more students to replace them...
This plan failed because he never found anybody to replace me.
Either nobody was willing to hire on and try to learn MFX, or everyone
that he hired was not smart enough to learn MFX and so he wasted his money.

Tom Hart had to rely on his younger brother John Hart and his long-time
employee Steve Brault to do all of the MFX programming, and so Testra
continued to be a small company for 20 years because they lacked the
programming staff to take on big jobs.
Quite frankly, neither John Hart or Steve Brault are all that good
at assembly-language programming. John Hart is primarily a hardware designer.
His bailiwick is designing a processor and programming HDL to implement it.
This isn't exactly the same as application programming.
Steve Brault wrote the motion-control software for the boards, and that is
application programming, but my recollection is that his understanding of
MFX assembly-language wasn't very strong. I think that what Testra did
for 20 years is rely on Steve Brault to program in Forth using the
hundreds of primitives that I wrote in 1994/1995, but they didn't do a lot
of new assembly-language programming.
There is nobody in the world who knows how to program in MFX assembly-language
at my level --- the smart students weren't 10% or 5%, but were 0%.

Tom Hart says:

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:

> The official answer from Tom Hart, their president,
> who agreed to have his answer to me published on clf:
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

> Why your relationship ceased,
>
> He was difficult to work with.

> He did fine if it was something he could do by himself without supervision,
> but if it was a team effort, forget it.
>
> I let him go myself,
> after I had given him a project to write a DXF converter to HPGL code.

> He would not take any direction.

> I scrapped the project.

Nothing like this actually happened.
He makes it sound like I was begging to keep my job and he sternly fired me.
I was only making $10/hour, and as the DXF2G (DXF to CNC gcode) program
finished up, my hours dwindled down to less than 10 per week, so I wasn't
making enough money to continue. I found another job working in a factory
that did machining of aluminum parts and sheet-metal bending.
John Hart tried to keep throwing work my way so I wouldn't leave.
He gave me a project to write a program to serialize the MiniForth PLDs.
I did this. It modified the description file of the PLD to insert a
32-bit serial number into it. This was fast and easy compared to using
the HDL system to rebuild the MiniForth PLD just for that minor modification.
He wanted me to upgrade this to 64-bit. I did this, but my upgrade didn't
work because I was working from home rather than using the computer at
Testra and hence doing it without the needed information. John Hart
told me to come in to Testra and do the job and make it work.
I never went in and I never called back. I just stopped showing up.
The problem was that I wanted to do this on the weekend, but he insisted
that it be done right away, and given that I was working 8 hours per day
at the factory, I really wasn't going to drive over to Testra and put in
2 hours after work. I was already in trouble at the factory because I had
arrived to work late several times, and this was due to me doing Testra
work in the evenings and then not getting enough sleep to get up and
go to the factory the next day. So I just stopped doing Testra work.
Later on I found out that Tom Hart was severely mad at me because
I wasn't loyal to Testra and didn't consider Testra to be my #1 priority.
This is what he means when he says that I wasn't a "team player."
There were no team-programming projects at Testra; I always worked alone
and had zero guidance as to how to get the task done. Tom Hart's idea
of giving me direction was to say: "Just do it!" (like the Nike advert).
Tom Hart means I wasn't a team player because my loyalty evaporated and I quit.
I don't actually have any moral obligation to be loyal to Testra though.
Loyalty has to be bought, and it costs more than $10 per hour.

[Rod Pemberton]

On Fri, 27 Dec 2019 21:59:55 -0800 (PST)
hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

<OT business>

> Lets say that 10% of the students are smart enough to become
> specialists.

No, that's way too high. 1% is realistic.

A combination of necessary intelligence, self-selection, and employee
attrition or turnover (people leaving for more money or better
opportunities) will prevent you from ever achieving your 10% goal. Of
course, the majority of those who are interested in becoming
specialists will mostly be sub-par, or below what is truly necessary to
do the job properly. They'll lack intellect or the skills required
because the business is underpaying for "low-level", "replaceable"
or "disposable" jobs. This is where a smart business owner will use
technology to assist their less-than-adequate employees and job
candidates perform like someone with a PhD. A better strategy is to
"over-hire" someone with the intellect and skills required to perform
the job perfectly, instead of merely adequately, and then pay them very
well. E.g., most low-level technician jobs requires someone with the
intellect of a professor to perform the job properly, but that's not
what type of people hire into those jobs, because of pay or education
requirements.

> So Filipiak fires his specialist for demanding too much
> money, and he replaces him with 10 students.

Won't work.

In the U.S. market, the specialist will be making $65K to $85K USD and
the students - worst case scenario - will make $15K USD for minimum
wage. 10 x $15K is $150K, which is about double what the specialist
would earn. Even in a highly priced market, e.g., New York city or San
Francisco, the specialist would only make $120K USD, which still
wouldn't justify hiring 10 people. That's ignoring problems such as
coordinating 10 students to function as one individual and the lost
opportunity cost to the business from the time it takes for each
student to become proficient in their job. That's also ignoring the
80%/20% Pareto rule, i.e., which says that 20% of the people actually
do 80% of the work. This means that only 2 of the 10 are actually doing
80% of the work, or 40% each. The other 8 are free loaders doing only
2.5% of the work each. These 8 are not paid well on an hourly basis,
but are paid well on a per amount of work basis, i.e., lazy
non-workers. So, you should fire 8 out of the 10 and push the
remaining 2 workers into doing 100% of the work, or 50% each. 2 x $15K
is $30K, which is justifiable.

> This plan failed because he never found anybody to replace me.

Certain people are irreplaceable in a business, but businesses never
recognize that.

I've seen numerous businesses fail, i.e., go bankrupt, when they fail
to take heed of this. However, businesses don't look at it that way.
Most businesses believe in the motto, "Everybody is replaceable."
This is merely authoritarian, "My way or the highway" thinking. It's
about control. The number one thing business owners fear is loss of
control, which is why they only use money from banks or family and
friends. Also, the only thing most businesses measure is timeliness,
so they have no idea of the effect of one individual upon an
organization, especially someone smart, talented, or experienced. What
most business owners want is consistency in their business, low cost of
operating their business, and conscientiousness ("Do your work. Do it
well. Do it without me telling you to get to work.") in their
employees. Business owners hate employees that create drama,
arguments, conflicts, or disruption. They want perfect little human
"robots". If they have to use 10 "dumb," replaceable people to get
their desired combination of cheapness and reliability, without having
to deal with employee attitude, then they will do so. Most businesses
are too focused on keeping costs down, instead of improving quality to
boost revenues.


Rod Pemberton
--
"It's OK to be White." <-- investigated by FBI as a hate crime
"Black Lives Matter." <-- not being investigated ...

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 11:41:36 AM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Dec 2019 21:59:55 -0800 (PST)
> hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <OT business>
>
> > Lets say that 10% of the students are smart enough to become
> > specialists.
>
> No, that's way too high. 1% is realistic.

How would you know this? You are dumber than dirt.

> "It's OK to be White." <-- investigated by FBI as a hate crime
> "Black Lives Matter." <-- not being investigated ...

You are in the same category as Robert L..
Piss off!

[Rod Pemberton]

On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 12:14:59 -0800 (PST)
hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 11:41:36 AM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Dec 2019 21:59:55 -0800 (PST)
> > hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

<OT, sigh, using logic on Hugh, yet again ...>

> > > Lets say that 10% of the students are smart enough to become
> > > specialists.
> >
> > No, that's way too high. 1% is realistic.
>
> How would you know this?

AISI, I was one of the top four (to maybe six) students in my high
school class of roughly 400 (or thereabouts) in terms of intellect.
Considering that they are the only students whom I believe were ever
likely to be smart enough to truly become "specialists" at some point
in their lives, I get the 1% from the very simple math of
4/400x100%=1%. Fair enough? Obviously, the numbers aren't exact.

> You are dumber than dirt.

I'm dumber than dirt? Ok ... Brake check.

As an example of my "dumber than dirt" intelligence, in high school, I
earned straight A+'s in (advanced placement) A.P. Calculus II, A.P.
Physics II, A.P. Chemistry II, etc ... I could solve 20 geometry
problems correctly in 2 minutes flat. I could solve roughly 53
difficult physics problems in about 42 minutes. No one else in my
class was able to do that, although the other top students were close,
at least for physics problems. However, the other smart students were
still slower than me. AIR, I had a perfect score on the math portion of
the SAT's (ah, but don't quote me on that, as that was decades ago and
my school record's aren't nearby). I'm also the only person who ever
scored higher than about 37% on my state's spatial-relationship test
(at the time I took the test, since I don't know what's happened since
then, but I can presume much of the same from all future students too,
i.e., no better than about 37%). I got 100%, but they originally
thought I missed one ... They were wrong. My perfect test result meant
that my state identified a transcription error on a their test which
they had given for decades. And, as of today, many decades later now,
many thousands of friends, family, fellow students, co-workers, and
acquaintances later, I'm still the only person I've ever known who
figured out how to solve a Rubik's cube on their own.

So, yeah, Hugh, I'm just totally fucking dumber than dirt. (sarcasm)

Did that tickle your flawed confirmation bias, until you saw the
sarcasm indication?

Now, that you know some things about me (on both my academics and my
past minority friendships), I'd like to know something about you. Just
how do you stack up Hugh? Are you happy now that you know more about
me, or are you going to shove your head in a hole out of embarrassment
because you simply don't compare? I suspect the later as that's what
usually happens to other people in this situation, but I truly hope
that's not the case for you. I hope you have the courage to reveal who
you are/were regardless. You're so boastful, and do so much
"peacocking" here (self-promotion), that I'd really like to know.

Also, why do you keep calling me out on random wrong-headed shit (on
both my academics and my past minority friendships)? You've been
correct 0% of the time so far. You know this accomplishes nothing for
you. You're throwing stones by hand at a castle. All you can get from
this is what type of person I am or was, but you're doing it in a
hostile manner.

> > "It's OK to be White." <-- investigated by FBI as a hate crime
> > "Black Lives Matter." <-- not being investigated ...
>

> You are in the same category as Robert L... Piss off!

Pointing out racial discrimination in the FBI angers you?

Doing exactly that seems to be a fundamental goal of liberals and
Democrats, and for many decades now. (BTW, I'm an independent, or
technically a Libertarian according to Political Science, and not a
conservative, nor Republican, nor authoritarian, nor anarchist, nor
terrorist, etc, as people get confused when I call out liberals and
Democrats.)

For you, as a minority (in the U.S.), this would seem to be a rather
bizarre and wholly illogical perspective. If the FBI is willing to
discriminate against the majority race (white people, i.e., people of
European descent) in the U.S., do you think that the FBI would even
hesitate to not discriminate against minorities? No, of course, they
wouldn't, if that is the situation, which some claim it is. To solve
problems, you always start by solving the easiest problem first, then
work your way up into harder problems. With racism, the easiest
problem to solve is to simply NOT discriminate against the largest
group of the people, i.e., the majority (which happens to be white in
the U.S.). Hence, it's only logical that the FBI shouldn't discriminate
against whites, as that's the first step in making sure that the FBI is
not discriminating against minorities too. In life, you can't have
things both ways, i.e., you can't have the FBI discriminating against
whites, while the FBI is not discriminating against minorities, at the
same time, or vice versa. That corrupts the entire organization. So,
if you want to have a racist FBI, keep saying that the FBI should
investigate white people for racism while dismissing investigations of
black people for racism, as you did when you rejected my tag-lines.

I really don't know why you insist on arguing with me Hugh on stupid
shit like racism (instead of on Forth where maybe my replies might
actually help you someday), as I can prove that just about anyone or
anything is racist, with the appropriate framing or perspective. E.g.,
I can prove that all of our tech companies are racist (be it Microsoft,
Google, Facebook, Amazon, Tesla, etc) or that San Franciscans are
racist but not New Yorkers, and even that God (presuming it's
existence) is racist too. I can do much the same with politics too,
i.e., prove you're beliefs are wrong if you're a liberal, Democrat,
conservative, Republican, authoritarian, anarchist or terrorist. I can
do much the same with Christianity too, i.e., prove you don't know what
you're talking about according to the Christian KJV Bible.

So, why not stick to on-topic conversations about Forth?


Rod Pemberton
--

[a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid]

Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 12:14:59 -0800 (PST)
> hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 11:41:36 AM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton
>> wrote:
>
>> > "It's OK to be White." <-- investigated by FBI as a hate crime
>> > "Black Lives Matter." <-- not being investigated ...
>>
>> You are in the same category as Robert L... Piss off!
>
> Pointing out racial discrimination in the FBI angers you?

Never mind if it angers Hugh or not, it's just a lie that "Black Lives
Matter" isn't being investigated,

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/10/06/the-fbi-has-identified-a-new-domestic-terrorist-threat-and-its-black-identity-extremists/
https://theintercept.com/2019/03/23/black-identity-extremist-fbi-domestic-terrorism/
https://www.aclu.org/blog/racial-justice/race-and-criminal-justice/fbi-wont-hand-over-its-surveillance-records-black
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/11/rakem-balogun-interview-black-identity-extremists-fbi-surveillance
https://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-abandons-use-of-terms-black-identity-extremism-11563921355

You can find dozens more.

> So, why not stick to on-topic conversations about Forth?

Why not, indeed?

Andrew.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 11:54:09 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> ...

Piss off!

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Monday, December 30, 2019 at 2:50:21 AM UTC-7, a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:
> ...

Piss off!

[Rod Pemberton]

On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 03:50:14 -0600
a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:

> Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
> > On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 12:14:59 -0800 (PST)
> > hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 11:41:36 AM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton
> >> wrote:

> >> > "It's OK to be White." <-- investigated by FBI as a hate crime
> >> > "Black Lives Matter." <-- not being investigated ...
> >>
> >> You are in the same category as Robert L... Piss off!
> >
> > Pointing out racial discrimination in the FBI angers you?
>
> Never mind if it angers Hugh or not, it's just a lie that "Black Lives
> Matter" isn't being investigated,
>

> [links]

> You can find dozens more.
>

The last one is behind a paywall/subscribe-wall. Two don't even
mention "Black Lives Matter" anywhere. Two mention that a) the FBI
broadened their definitions to include newer categories of hate
crimes/groups, and b) also mentioned paranoia by BLM participants that
they believe they're being investigated by the FBI. However, neither
article actually states that BLM is/was ever being investigated by the
FBI.

So, I'm not yet convinced "it's just a lie" that BLM isn't being
investigated. They probably are, but it's not been publicly
stated that they are. This is unlike the innocent white people who
simply and openly made the other statement, and aren't even part of a
political movement or racist group of any sort, who are now being
openly and publicly investigated by the FBI as racists engaged in hate
crimes. Therefore, it appears that my tag-lines are still correct: the
FBI is blatantly engaging in anti-white racism.

> > So, why not stick to on-topic conversations about Forth?
>
> Why not, indeed?
>

Well, that goes for you too now ... It's a pity that you finally fell
into another cesspool Hugh started.


Rod Pemberton
--

[a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid]

Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 03:50:14 -0600
> a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:
>
>> Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 12:14:59 -0800 (PST)
>> > hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On Saturday, December 28, 2019 at 11:41:36 AM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton
>> >> wrote:
>
>> >> > "It's OK to be White." <-- investigated by FBI as a hate crime
>> >> > "Black Lives Matter." <-- not being investigated ...
>> >>
>> >> You are in the same category as Robert L... Piss off!
>> >
>> > Pointing out racial discrimination in the FBI angers you?
>>
>> Never mind if it angers Hugh or not, it's just a lie that "Black Lives
>> Matter" isn't being investigated,
>>
>> [links]
>> You can find dozens more.
>
> The last one is behind a paywall/subscribe-wall. Two don't even
> mention "Black Lives Matter" anywhere.

Oh, right. That's OK then.

> So, I'm not yet convinced "it's just a lie" that BLM isn't being
> investigated. They probably are,

Thank you. So your comment was "probably" wrong, then.

> but it's not been publicly stated that they are.

Like that matters.

> This is unlike the innocent white people who simply and openly made
> the other statement, and aren't even part of a political movement or
> racist group of any sort, who are now being openly and publicly
> investigated by the FBI as racists engaged in hate crimes.

Why not? The FBI will surely not find anything to prosecute if the
group really innocent. Surely? Are you saying they should pre-judge
people's innocence and not investigate?

> Therefore, it appears that my tag-lines are still correct: the FBI
> is blatantly engaging in anti-white racism.

No, it does not so appear. And that is not what you claimed, which was
that "Black Lives Matter" was not being investigated by the
FBI. That's a pretty strong claim.

>> > So, why not stick to on-topic conversations about Forth?
>>
>> Why not, indeed?
>
> Well, that goes for you too now ... It's a pity that you finally fell
> into another cesspool Hugh started.

From what I can see, he didn't start that, you did. If you make an
untrue claim and get called on it, that's how it's supposed to work.
Even in a .sig.

Andrew.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 11:54:09 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote:

> Also, why do you keep calling me out on random wrong-headed shit (on
> both my academics and my past minority friendships)? You've been
> correct 0% of the time so far.

I don't think you have any friends in any race --- because you're a jackass.

You're also dumber than dirt in regard to computer programming ---
you routinely troll these forums by making bizarre obviously wrong
statements, hoping that somebody will correct you, then you respond with
more bizarre obviously wrong statements and/or some off-topic nonsense,
all in the hope of keeping the conversation going as long as possible.

I've never seen any evidence that you know more about programming
than Gavino does --- at least Gavino is nice...

> > You are in the same category as Robert L... Piss off!
>
> Pointing out racial discrimination in the FBI angers you?

> ...

> For you, as a minority (in the U.S.), this would seem to be a rather
> bizarre and wholly illogical perspective. If the FBI is willing to
> discriminate against the majority race (white people, i.e., people of
> European descent) in the U.S., do you think that the FBI would even
> hesitate to not discriminate against minorities?

Piss off, racist troll!

I'm the only programmer in the world who has written an assembler
for a VLIW Forth processor, so I'm a minority of one.

You have no accomplishments --- so, congratulations on being in the majority!

I have yet to meet anybody other than John Hart who even knows what
VLIW means --- over on opencores.org the term VLIW is used as a synonym
for "super-duper," but those aren't VLIW processors.
(John Hart never used the term VLIW or WISC or any other term though;
I just picked up these terms later in my reading).

In summary: Piss off!

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 at 4:19:39 AM UTC-7, a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:
> Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
> > So, I'm not yet convinced "it's just a lie" that BLM isn't being
> > investigated. They probably are,
>
> Thank you. So your comment was "probably" wrong, then.
>
> > but it's not been publicly stated that they are.
>
> Like that matters.

None of this matters.
This is just off-topic trolling.

> >> > So, why not stick to on-topic conversations about Forth?
> >>
> >> Why not, indeed?
> >
> > Well, that goes for you too now ... It's a pity that you finally fell
> > into another cesspool Hugh started.
>
> From what I can see, he didn't start that, you did. If you make an
> untrue claim and get called on it, that's how it's supposed to work.
> Even in a .sig.

I didn't call him on his sig being untrue.
I don't care if BLM is being investigated by the FBI or not.
I called him on off-topic trolling --- always true about Rod Pemberton.
I told him: Piss off!

You can piss off too --- you responded to Rod Pemberton as a peer ---
this means that you are a jackass too.

You are dumber than dirt in regard to programming.
You failed badly at writing a <SWITCH construct --- instead, you went to
EuroForth-2018 and did a lot of braying about how you are the world's expert
on the subject. I've not seen any evidence that you know anything about
the subject however.

For your education, this is code that works:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\ ******
\ ****** This is a <SWITCH control-structure like in C that generates a jump-table.
\ ******

\ You can build a colon word called XXX that switches on targ values. This is how:
\ <SWITCH
\ :NONAME ... ; targ CASE-OF
\ ...
\ :NONAME ... ; FAST-SWITCH> xxx ( selector -- )

\ There are some simple additions as well: RANGE-OF CHARS-OF for a range of values or a set of chars.
\ Also, we have CASE: suggested by DXForth that can be used instead of CASE-OF .

\ The colon word XXX executes a table-entry corresponding to the targ value.
\ If there is no match, then the xt value prior to FAST-SWITCH> is executed as the default.
\ All of the table-entries and the default are given the selector value which they DROP if not needed.
\ It was HAA's suggestion that the selector value be provided --- I had dropped it internally previously.

\ The targ values don't have to be provided in any particular order --- they get sorted internally.
\ If a duplicate targ value is provided, CASE-OF will abort with an error message at compile-time.

\ This is pretty crude because, unlike in C, the table entries can't have common local variables.
\ I would have liked to use my rquotations, but they don't have an xt that is known at compile-time,
\ so it is not possible to build a jump-table at compile-time. They have a "continuation" that is only known at run-time.
\ My <SWITCH that I have here uses :NONAME for the table entries --- they can have common global variables.

\ FAST-SWITCH> uses the selector value as an index to do the table look up. This is very fast.
\ If the range is too large however, then FAST-SWITCH> will abort with an error message to save memory.
\ In this case, use SLOW-SWITCH> instead. This builds a smaller table and uses BSEARCH to look up the table-entry.

\ Set JT-LIMIT to the range that you want FAST-SWITCH> to support.
\ It is currently set at 2^16 so you can have jump-tables with up to 64K entries. These consume a lot of memory.
\ If memory usage is an issue, then set JT-LIMIT to a smaller value. Use SLOW-SWITCH> instead of FAST-SWITCH>.
\ If the jump-table is sparse, SLOW-SWITCH> might be faster because there is less data-cache thrashing.

\ <SWITCH is primarily provided for writing VM simulators.
\ JT-LIMIT is currently set at 2^16, so it supports simulating a micro-processor with 16-bit opcodes (such as the AVR).
\ SLOW-SWITCH> would be needed for a micro-processor with 32-bit opcodes (such as the ARM or MIPS).

\ Some micro-processors (or byte-code VMs) have 8-bit opcodes, but also have post-bytes on some of the opcodes.
\ These variable-sized opcodes could be done with nested FAST-SWITCH> constructs.

list
w field .xt
w field .targ
constant jt

: init-jt ( xt targ node -- node )
init-list >r
r@ .targ !
r@ .xt !
r> ;

: new-jt ( xt targ -- node )
jt alloc
init-jt ;

: kill-jt ( head -- )
each[ dealloc ]each ;

: show-jt ( head -- )
each[ cr .targ @ . ]each ;

: jt> ( new-node node -- new-node flag ) \ used by INSERT-ORDERED to build an ascending list without duplicates
.targ @ over .targ @
2dup = abort" *** <SWITCH structures not allowed to have duplicate targ values ***"
> ;

: <switch ( -- head )
nil ;

: case-of ( head xt targ -- new-head ) \ provide a targ value
new-jt \ -- head node
['] jt> swap insert-ordered drop ;

: range-of { head xt lo hi -- new-head } \ provide a range from LO to HI inclusive
head
hi 1+ lo do
xt I case-of
loop ;

: chars-of { head xt adr cnt -- new-head } \ provide a string containing targ chars
head
adr cnt + adr do
xt I c@ case-of
loop ;

: digit-of ( head xt -- new-head )
[char] 0 [char] 9 range-of ;

: lower-of ( head xt -- new-head )
[char] a [char] z range-of ;

: upper-of ( head xt -- new-head )
[char] A [char] Z range-of ;

: alpha-of { head xt -- new-head }
head
xt lower-of xt upper-of ;

: punctuation-of ( head xt -- new-head )
s| .,!?'";:[]()@#$%&| chars-of ;

: blank-of ( head xt -- new-head )
0 32 range-of ;

1 16 lshift value jt-limit \ should be at least 256 so we can support byte-code simulators

\ JT-LIMIT is the index that is too big for the jump-table. This can be any reasonable size.
\ The jump-table size is limited so the programmer doesn't accidentally build a jump-table consuming megabytes.
\ I set it at 2^16 to support simulating a micro-processor with 16-bit opcodes.

: fast-switch> { head default | adr offset size -- } \ stream: name
align here to adr
head .targ @ to offset
head tail .targ @ offset - to size
size jt-limit u> abort" *** FAST-SWITCH> has too large of a range. Use SLOW-SWITCH> instead. ***"
offset head each[ >r \ -- targ
begin r@ .targ @ over <> while default , 1+ repeat
r> .xt @ , 1+ ]each drop
: ( selector -- )
dup, offset lit, -, \ -- selector index
dup, size lit, u>, if, drop, default lit, execute, end,
w lit, *, adr lit, +, @, execute, ;,
head kill-jt ;

: slow-search ( array limit target -- element|false ) \ hard-coded for use by SLOW-SWITCH>
>r \ -- array limit \ return: -- target
begin dup while
dup 1 rshift \ -- array limit mid
dup d * fourth + \ -- array limit mid mid-element
r@ over @ = if nip nip nip rdrop exit then \ if found, return MID-ELEMENT
r@ over @ < if \ search left side
drop nip \ -- array mid \ MID is the new limit
else
d + >r \ -- array limit mid \ return: -- target new-array \ NEW-ARRAY is one element above middle element
1+ - \ -- array new-limit \ the 1+ is so we don't include the middle element
nip r> swap \ -- new-array new-limit \ MID-ELEMENT is the new ARRAY
then
repeat \ LIMIT is zero, so it can be used as a FALSE flag
nip rdrop ; \ -- false

\ SLOW-SEARCH assumes that the array element is D in size (two cells),
\ and the first cell is the integer that we are comparing against.

: slow-switch> { head default | adr size -- } \ stream: name
dalign here to adr \ use DALIGN so the element SLOW-SEARCH finds will be in the same data-cache line
head length to size
head each[ dup .targ @ , .xt @ , ]each
: ( selector -- )
adr lit, size lit, rover, postpone slow-search
dup, if, w lit, +, @, execute, end,
drop, default lit, execute, ;,
head kill-jt ;

\ CASE: and ;; were suggested by DXForth on comp.lang.forth to improve readability.
\ This works well when there is a list of integers, similar to CASE END-CASE in ANS-Forth.

get-current synonym case: :noname \ head targ -- head targ

: ;; ( head targ -- new-head ) \ this concludes the CASE: function (rather than ; as used in :NONAME usually)
postpone ; \ -- head targ xt
swap case-of ;
immediate

\ Note that the default should still be :NONAME and end with ; as usual.

\ Testra had a switch construct written in UR/Forth assembly-language that built two arrays,
\ one of targ values and one of xt values. It generated code that would use SCASW to search the targ values.
\ I recommended using a binary search instead. I was told that SCASW is faster, even though it is sequential.
\ On the 80486, the ciscy instructions did usually provide better performance than hand-written code.
\ Because Testra was into building custom processors, they needed a fast simulator.
\ I didn't use their simulator for the MiniForth though --- I wrote my own in MFX.

\ The best way to write a simulator is to have your assembler not only generate the machine-code
\ for the target processor, but also generate a Forth program on the host machine that simulates it.
\ This generated simulation is much faster than a simulator that looks up opcodes at run-time.
\ This only works if you have the source-code for the target processor program that you are simulating.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Rod Pemberton]

On Wed, 01 Jan 2020 05:19:33 -0600

a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:

> Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 03:50:14 -0600
> > a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:

> > So, I'm not yet convinced "it's just a lie" that BLM isn't being
> > investigated. They probably are,
>
> Thank you. So your comment was "probably" wrong, then.

That's an extreme distortion of what I said, a non-sequitur. Also, you
shouldn't place words in other people's mouths. It's extremely rude
and disrespectful.

> > but it's not been publicly stated that they are.
>
> Like that matters.
>

It does. As I said, the white people being investigated weren't
involved in any crimes. They're being investigated for free speech.

OMG, I forgot, you don't have free speech in England anymore! You get
busted and jailed for free speech now. So you must think it's perfectly
fine for others in the world to suffer just as your countrymen now do?
So, yeah, I guess it doesn't matter to you guys anymore. How sad.
Free speech still matters to those who still have it.

First, they took away your right to self-determination by preventing
separatism and independence (Scotland, Northern Ireland). Second, they
took away your guns, and then knives. Next, they'll take away your
right to free speech. Currently, they're about to take away your right
to belong to a union of states, i.e., E.U., with a strong economic
union. Soon, they'll take away your collective bargaining rights too.
Finally, they'll take away your pensions. I guess you're lucky you get
to leach or free-load from government paid-for health care, as you
don't know what health care actually costs.

> > This is unlike the innocent white people who simply and openly made
> > the other statement, and aren't even part of a political movement or
> > racist group of any sort, who are now being openly and publicly
> > investigated by the FBI as racists engaged in hate crimes.
>
> Why not? The FBI will surely not find anything to prosecute if the
> group really innocent. Surely? Are you saying they should pre-judge
> people's innocence and not investigate?
>

In the U.S., you must have cause to investigate a crime as people are
presumed to be innocent. Free speech does not constitute criminality.
I.e., there must be some indicator of criminality to investigate, other
than free speech which even if racist doesn't constitute a hate crime.

> > Therefore, it appears that my tag-lines are still correct: the FBI
> > is blatantly engaging in anti-white racism.
>
> No, it does not so appear.

Yes, it does so appear. None of your links backed up your false claim,
i.e., that my claims are untrue.

> And that is not what you claimed,

It is. (Specifically, it's only half of what was claimed, and you've
distorted that half.)

> which was that "Black Lives Matter" was not being investigated by the
> FBI.

That is only half of the claim. There were two lines. Why did you
choose to focus only on one of them? Willful blindness? They go
together.

> That's a pretty strong claim.

Strong?

What's a "pretty strong claim" is your unfounded belief that the BLM is
being investigated.

If I said, you're not being investigated by the FBI, is that a strong
claim? No, of course not. It's not even a weak claim. It's a
non-claim. You can make that non-claim claim of nearly anyone, and it'd
be entirely true. I.e., I see your statement that someone /NOT/ being
investigated by the FBI is a somehow a /STRONG/ claim as being
completely wrong, as some form of magical thinking, when there is no
proof, nor official statement of such.

> >> > So, why not stick to on-topic conversations about Forth?
> >>
> >> Why not, indeed?
> >
> > Well, that goes for you too now ... It's a pity that you finally
> > fell into another cesspool Hugh started.
>
> From what I can see, he didn't start that, you did.

That's a complete lie.

Hugh called me racist for something that's not racist, but something
which actually pointed out racism. It pointed out racism against white
people. The fact that you misinterpreted it and attempted to falsely
twist it into something it wasn't so that it fit into your biased
political narrative, i.e., racism against black people, doesn't change
the fact that what I said was wholly non-racist and is still is true.

> If you make an untrue claim and get called on it,

But, I didn't get called out for making an untrue claim. I got falsely
called out for making a true claim. Your response to it is what's
called a straw man argument.


Rod Pemberton
--

[Rod Pemberton]

On Wed, 1 Jan 2020 19:08:05 -0800 (PST)
hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 at 4:19:39 AM UTC-7,
> a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:
> > Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
> > > So, I'm not yet convinced "it's just a lie" that BLM isn't being
> > > investigated. They probably are,

> > Thank you. So your comment was "probably" wrong, then.
> >
> > > but it's not been publicly stated that they are.
> >
> > Like that matters.
>
> None of this matters.

...

> This is just off-topic trolling.

I'm glad you finally admitted to it. It's truly amazing that after
all those years of rants and trolling by you, you finally copped to it.

Yes, that wasn't what you meant to say, but it is what you said.

> > >> > So, why not stick to on-topic conversations about Forth?
> > >>
> > >> Why not, indeed?
> > >
> > > Well, that goes for you too now ... It's a pity that you finally
> > > fell into another cesspool Hugh started.
> >
> > From what I can see, he didn't start that, you did. If you make an
> > untrue claim and get called on it, that's how it's supposed to work.
> > Even in a .sig.
>
> I didn't call him on his sig being untrue.
> I don't care if BLM is being investigated by the FBI or not.
> I called him on off-topic trolling --- always true about Rod
> Pemberton. I told him: Piss off!

What off-topic trolling? I legitimately responded to your off-topic
rant. It contained no Forth. Was your rant just a troll? ... So, you
get to troll all of us, repeatedly and incessantly, but no one else gets
to troll you? Damn hypocrite!

> You can piss off too --- you responded to Rod Pemberton as a peer ---
> this means that you are a jackass too.

If you look at everyone else and all you see are jackasses, maybe
you're seeing your own self-projection?


Rod Pemberton
--

[Rod Pemberton]

On Wed, 1 Jan 2020 18:56:15 -0800 (PST)
hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 11:54:09 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton
> wrote:

> > Also, why do you keep calling me out on random wrong-headed shit (on
> > both my academics and my past minority friendships)? You've been
> > correct 0% of the time so far.
>
> I don't think you have any friends in any race --- because you're a
> jackass.

This is clearly self-projection.

My dark triad traits are so low as to be immeasurable (for real).

> You're also dumber than dirt in regard to computer programming ---
> you routinely troll these forums by making bizarre obviously wrong
> statements, hoping that somebody will correct you, then you respond
> with more bizarre obviously wrong statements and/or some off-topic
> nonsense, all in the hope of keeping the conversation going as long
> as possible.

Honestly, I've never done that. AISI, I've only a) responded properly
on on-topic conversations on Forth related and programming issues and b)
responded improperly on off-topic conversations to point out the fact
that they're off topic. If you misunderstood, that's an issue you need
to fix.

Yes, I have responded to numerous off-topic trollish rants by you on
the bizarre and irrational hatred you have for various people here,
i.e., anyone involved with the Forth specifications.

> I've never seen any evidence that you know more about programming
> than Gavino does --- at least Gavino is nice...

As noted by others, you - much like your claim about Ms. Rather - had
never posted any code here until the last year or two. So, the same
claim you made can legitimately be made of you.

AFAIR, everything you've posted code-wise has been a flawed, useless
mess of spaghetti code. Alex, Anton, Andrew, Jerry, Stephen, Bernd,
and and even John have all pointed this out to you, repeatedly.

Gavino is nice? You must not have been reading his posts over the past
year as "Azimihoth" or some such (Azathoth Hastur), i.e., Gavino's been
both insulting and racist. Of course, he's not homophobic like you.

Have I posted code to solve a specific problem? No.
Have I posted Forth definitions I've used in my Forth? Yes.
Have I posted Forth definitions from a solver I extended? Yes.

You must be willfully blind, as I've had numerous conversations on
programming and Forth while here, including, but not limited to, issues
with the specifications, implementations of various Forth words,
parsing of Forth, minimally viable Forths, etc.

> > > You are in the same category as Robert L... Piss off!
> >
> > Pointing out racial discrimination in the FBI angers you?
> > ...
> > For you, as a minority (in the U.S.), this would seem to be a rather
> > bizarre and wholly illogical perspective. If the FBI is willing to
> > discriminate against the majority race (white people, i.e., people
> > of European descent) in the U.S., do you think that the FBI would
> > even hesitate to not discriminate against minorities?
>
> Piss off, racist troll!

I'm not racist. I'm not a troll. And, I'm not going anywhere. You've
not contributed anything to this group in at least a decade besides
trollish rants which annoys everyone. So, why don't you leave?

Of course, one of my past friends (African-American) said that all white
people are racist by default in the eyes of the African-American
community ... which is racist, but nothing compared to the extremely
racist comments directed at me simply because of my skin color.

> I'm the only programmer in the world who has written an assembler
> for a VLIW Forth processor, so I'm a minority of one.

That's great. A man with such intellect and skill in Forth should be
able to code a minimal Forth system fairly quickly. So, why is your
personal Forth taking so long? ...

> You have no accomplishments --- so, congratulations on being in the
> majority!

You can't read apparently.

> I have yet to meet anybody other than John Hart who even knows what
> VLIW means

I do. My earlier background was in Electrical Engineering (EE). And,
I'm sure that more than a few people here know what VLIW means, e.g.,
Bernd (EE), Anton (PhD), Stephen (probably EE), etc ...

> Piss off!

Didn't you say you got arrested for that?

[dxforth]

On Friday, January 3, 2020 at 10:31:35 AM UTC+11, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> ...

> First, they took away your right to self-determination by preventing
> separatism and independence (Scotland, Northern Ireland). Second, they
> took away your guns, and then knives. Next, they'll take away your
> right to free speech. Currently, they're about to take away your right
> to belong to a union of states, i.e., E.U., with a strong economic
> union. Soon, they'll take away your collective bargaining rights too.
> Finally, they'll take away your pensions. I guess you're lucky you get
> to leach or free-load from government paid-for health care, as you
> don't know what health care actually costs.

Not only do the UK public know what their health system costs them they
voted for it in the late 1940's and appear determined to keep it. If
there's anything that has united citizens it has been universal health
care. Doing something that benefits the whole of society.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42950587

[a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid]

Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jan 2020 05:19:33 -0600
> a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:
>
>> Rod Pemberton <nomai...@trgzxcqvbe.cpm> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 03:50:14 -0600
>> > a...@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:
>
>> > So, I'm not yet convinced "it's just a lie" that BLM isn't being
>> > investigated. They probably are,
>>
>> Thank you. So your comment was "probably" wrong, then.
>
> That's an extreme distortion of what I said, a non-sequitur. Also, you
> shouldn't place words in other people's mouths.

I didn't. You clamined that BLM isn't being investigated, then that
they probably are.

>> > but it's not been publicly stated that they are.
>>
>> Like that matters.
>
> It does. As I said, the white people being investigated weren't
> involved in any crimes. They're being investigated for free speech.
>
> OMG, I forgot, you don't have free speech in England anymore! You get
> busted and jailed for free speech now.

... batshit crazy attempt at deflection deleted ...

>> And that is not what you claimed,
>
> It is. (Specifically, it's only half of what was claimed, and you've
> distorted that half.)
>
>> which was that "Black Lives Matter" was not being investigated by
>> the FBI.
>
> That is only half of the claim. There were two lines. Why did you
> choose to focus only on one of them?

Because it's the half that is obviously untrue. The other half of the
claim may be true; I don't know.

>> If you make an untrue claim and get called on it,
>
> But, I didn't get called out for making an untrue claim.

I maintain that you did. At best it was inflammatory and irrelevant.

Andrew.

[Alex McDonald]

On 03-Jan-20 01:29, dxforth wrote:
> On Friday, January 3, 2020 at 10:31:35 AM UTC+11, Rod Pemberton wrote:

I don't see RP's guff except when folks reply, and O generally ignore them.

>> ...
>> First, they took away your right to self-determination by preventing
>> separatism and independence (Scotland, Northern Ireland). Second, they

We (the citizens of Scotland) voted to remain part of the UK. NI is
exceptionally complicated; the average Ulsterman or Éireann has a hard
time understanding Anglo-Irish politics.

>> took away your guns, and then knives. Next, they'll take away your

We've never had the right to personal weapons. The number of people in
the UK that want the right to bear any arms other than the two they were
born with is vanishingly small. Why on earth would you want us to shoot
or stab each other?

>> right to free speech. Currently, they're about to take away your right

The government hasn't done that. There's more to freedom of speech than
being able to call people knobheads on te intertubes. The UK ranks for
press freedom on 33rd place; the US in 48th.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index

>> to belong to a union of states, i.e., E.U., with a strong economic
>> union. Soon, they'll take away your collective bargaining rights too.

We voted to leave the EU. We have unfettered collective bargaining rights.

>> Finally, they'll take away your pensions. I guess you're lucky you get

No "they" won't.

>> to leach or free-load from government paid-for health care, as you
>> don't know what health care actually costs. >
> Not only do the UK public know what their health system costs them they
> voted for it in the late 1940's and appear determined to keep it. If
> there's anything that has united citizens it has been universal health
> care. Doing something that benefits the whole of society.
>
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42950587
>

That is one of the defining features of the UK's form of democracy &
capitalism; free healthcare paid by taxation. There isn't a person in
the UK that would consider scrapping it. Only the very stupid or someone
like RP, spaffing on a subject he knows less well than Forth, would
describe giving quality healthcare to the poor as free-loading.


--
Alex

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, January 2, 2020 at 4:31:35 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> Hugh called me racist for something that's not racist, but something
> which actually pointed out racism. It pointed out racism against white
> people. The fact that you misinterpreted it and attempted to falsely
> twist it into something it wasn't so that it fit into your biased
> political narrative, i.e., racism against black people, doesn't change
> the fact that what I said was wholly non-racist and is still is true.

I actually call Rod Pemberton a racist because he calls me a "minority."
This is an example:

On Wednesday, January 1, 2020 at 7:56:17 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 11:54:09 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote:

> > For you, as a minority (in the U.S.), this would seem to be a rather
> > bizarre and wholly illogical perspective. If the FBI is willing to
> > discriminate against the majority race (white people, i.e., people of
> > European descent) in the U.S., do you think that the FBI would even
> > hesitate to not discriminate against minorities?
>

> Piss off, racist troll!

I'm not actually a minority unless I explicitly play the minority card,
such as by applying for Affirmative Action. I have never done this.
Rod Pemberton cares if I am in a minority race or I am in
"the majority race (white people, i.e., people of European descent)."
That is racism.
That is also stupid because Spain is in Europe, so it is possible to
have an Hispanic name (Aguilar) and yet be white.
Even more stupid is that I may be of Spanish descent, but I'm a
5th generation American, so this is of historical interest at best.

In general, only racists care what my skin color is.
Weirdly, racist Mexicans say: "You can't speak Spanish. You're white!"
Racist Whites say: "You have an Hispanic name. You're brown!"
So, my skin color depends upon the political agenda of the observer! lol

Rod Pemberton is also a stalker:

On Friday, March 7, 2014 at 3:23:53 PM UTC-7, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> 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.

None of this is true.
I don't live in California, and I don't have an uncle, dying or otherwise.
Rod Pemberton is a stalker. He tries to find people's home addresses
and then post satellite photos of the people's home on public forums
along with the home address. That is very creepy!

> Rod Pemberton
> --
> "It's OK to be White." <-- investigated by FBI as a hate crime
> "Black Lives Matter." <-- not being investigated ...

I've been telling Rod Pemberton for years: Piss off!
I've never been arrested for doing so.
I intend to continue telling him this forever: Piss off!

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, September 29, 2019 at 7:29:09 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> I wrote MFX, which consisted of the assembler, simulator and
> Forth cross-compiler. The assembler rearranged the instructions
> so they would pack into the opcodes with as few NOP instructions
> as possible, while yet doing the same thing as if the instructions
> were assembled one per opcode in the same order that they appeared
> in the source-code. Up to 5 instructions could be packed into each
> opcode, and each opcode executed in one clock-cycle. The assembler
> also generated a program that ran on the host computer and simulated
> the execution of the target computer program.
>
> After I left, somebody (presumably John Hart and/or Steve Brault)
> wrote a traditional on-board interactive Forth system in MFX.
> I never saw this. Most likely it was pretty similar to the many
> Forth system available where you have the dictionary in the
> micro-controller memory and you have an outer-interpreter running
> on the micro-controller itself. It would not have an assembler
> available because it is not possible to write to code-memory
> while the MiniForth is running. All the primitives would need
> to be written ahead of time using the MFX assembler, similar to
> the way that figForth required an external assembler.
> This is not going to generate efficient code because it is not
> meta-compiling primitives. The advantage is that it is interactive
> so it allows fast testing and debugging in the usual Forth way.

>
> On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:08:59 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> > The official answer from Tom Hart, their president,
> > who agreed to have his answer to me published on clf:
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

> > and what he really achieved at TESTRA??
> >
> > He wrote our Forth compiler for the processor
> > that we implemented in a Lattice PLD.
> > ...
>
> This is a very puzzling statement for Tom Hart to say.
> For one thing, he says "compiler" rather than "cross-compiler."
> For another thing, he implies by omission that I didn't write
> the assembler/simulator, although I did.
> ...
> I just point this out because Juergen Pintaske (or possibly
> "Jurgen Pitaske" as the spelling seems to vary from day to day)
> will presumably now start saying that I didn't write the
> assembler/simulator for the MiniForth. I actually did though.
> This is something that I'm proud of. I'm not aware of anybody else
> who has ever done anything comparable.

Tom Hart has spent the last 25 years saying that I did not write
MFX (the assembler/simulator and the cross-compiler) for the MiniForth.
He either says that he personally wrote these, or he just vaguely says
that they were written in-house and that Testra did not need outside
programming help. Tom Hart is a liar!

I seem to have support from DXForth in this thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/DihLLsnxAi4

On Friday, January 31, 2020 at 6:27:03 PM UTC-7, dxforth wrote:
> Someone is paid to author a work. The employer owns the work and the
> copyright. The author has a 'moral right' to be identified as such
> but that's it. He doesn't own the work or copyright and never did.

DXForth is the author of a CP/M Forth, so he is not an important person,
but this is at least one person who seems to support the idea that
I have a 'moral right' to be identified by Tom Hart as the author
of MFX (the assembler/simulator and the cross-compiler).
Of course, a 'moral right' is worth nothing from a practical standpoint.

I had said this in that thread:

On Wednesday, January 29, 2020 at 8:52:48 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 29, 2020 at 1:39:00 PM UTC-7, Gerry Jackson wrote:
> > On 29/01/2020 19:33, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, January 29, 2020 at 5:30:45 AM UTC-7, Gerry Jackson wrote:
> > >> I just looked at http://www.testra.com/Forth/index.htm where there are
> > >> links to two papers by John Hart about everything that Forth was used
> > >> for. Did you do all that impressive amount of Forth work and he took the
> > >> credit? Did you write the papers?
> > >
> > > You are wildly exaggerating what I claim to have done, saying that I
> > > claim to have done things that I obviously didn't do.
> >
> > As so often you look for insults where none was intended. It is
> > impossible to have a rational discussion with you.
> >
> > [snipped a load of stuff I still haven't read]
> >
> > --
> > Gerry
>
> I'm familiar with those two papers.
> One of them describes the ISA of the RACE (formerly known as MiniForth).
> The other describes the Forth HDL and associated tools used to program
> the Lattice ISP-1048 PLD (used instead of LDL, the Lattice Design Language).
>
> Why would you ask me if I had done all of that impressive Forth work
> or written those papers? I have repeatedly said that I did not design
> the processor and that I don't know anything about HDL programming.
> As I said above:
>
> On Wednesday, January 29, 2020 at 12:33:55 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > You are wildly exaggerating what I claim to have done, saying that I
> > claim to have done things that I obviously didn't do.
> > You do this for the purpose of implying that none of my claims are true.
>
> Juergen Pintaske did the same thing.
> He told Tom Hart that I was claiming to have designed the processor,
> after I repeatedly told Juergen that I was not making any such claim.
>
> This is very similar to cointelpro --- you are both claiming that
> I said things that I didn't say, to make a third party angry at me.
>
> On Wednesday, January 29, 2020 at 12:33:55 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 29, 2020 at 5:30:45 AM UTC-7, Gerry Jackson wrote:
> > > > Also, they can't
> > > > upgrade MFX so they aren't getting full potential from the processor.
> > >
> > > Why not offer to upgrade it for them and make some money that way?
> >
> > Because they don't have any money!
>
> The MiniForth was a big deal in 1995, or at least, it had the potential
> to be a big deal. It was less expensive and faster running than
> mainstream processors designed to be programmed in C.
> This was the last time that Forth could compete with C and win!
>
> Now the MiniForth has been upgraded from the Lattice PLD to an FPGA.
> It is several times faster. Yay! Unfortunately, during the intervening
> 25 years, mainstream processors have gotten several several times faster.
> I doubt that the RACE can compete against the ARM Cortex in either speed
> or price. John Hart would know more, but that is my read on the situation.
>
> The advantage of the RACE is that it is reconfigurable (that is what the
> 'R' means), and the ARM Cortex is not. Reconfiguring a processor for
> an application is a heavy-duty solution that very few applications need.
> This also only works on applications with a huge Pareto Analysis ratio
> (instead of 80:20 it might be 99:1), and that small bottleneck gets
> done in hardware rather than software for a gigantic boost in speed.
> Applications such as this are uncommon.
>
> Another issue is that motion-control was a difficult problem in 1995,
> especially for the laser etcher. This problem hasn't gotten any more
> difficult though. You can't really crank up the laser super hot and
> make the etcher run super fast. The solution in 1995 continues to be
> adequate in 2019, except that now it is not just the MiniForth that
> can do this, but modern mainstream processors that can do this also.
>
> I'm saying that 1994 was the last time that Forth had a chance.
> The Forthers missed our chance!
> Now the Forth community is left with ANS-Forth that is a pile
> of crap, and Forth-200x that is just a bigger pile of the same.
> We are not going to get another chance!
> John Hart will take the RACE to the grave with him and nobody will care,
> because the RACE is of historical interest only.
>
> Upgrading MFX should have been done in the late 1990s,
> and I was the only programmer who could have done it.
> Too late now!

[dxforth]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 3:41:34 PM UTC+11, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> ...

> I seem to have support from DXForth in this thread:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/DihLLsnxAi4
>
> On Friday, January 31, 2020 at 6:27:03 PM UTC-7, dxforth wrote:
> > Someone is paid to author a work. The employer owns the work and the
> > copyright. The author has a 'moral right' to be identified as such
> > but that's it. He doesn't own the work or copyright and never did.
>
> DXForth is the author of a CP/M Forth, so he is not an important person,
> but this is at least one person who seems to support the idea that
> I have a 'moral right' to be identified by Tom Hart as the author
> of MFX (the assembler/simulator and the cross-compiler).
> Of course, a 'moral right' is worth nothing from a practical standpoint.

Not me - the law. It took many years for blacklisted screenwriters who
wrote under pseudonyms in the 1950's to be properly credited. I imagine
the new provisions in the law helped. For the copyright owners it would
have simply been an expense.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

You are saying that Tom Hart is legally obliged to credit me with
writing MFX just because I wrote MFX? I don't think that is true.

Even if it were true, how would I prove that I wrote MFX?
Maybe I should have taken a selfie of myself with the computer screen
in the background with the MFX.4TH file on it.

Even if I could prove that I wrote MFX, I don't have $100,000
to pay an attorney to force Tom Hart to credit me with writing MFX.

Even if I could force Tom Hart to credit me with writing MFX,
this is of historical interest only. In the year 2020, who cares?
He would most likely dodge the truth by saying:
"Yes, Hugh wrote MFX, but it was a bug-ridden pile of crap
that I had to fix after I fired his dumb ass."

Getting credit for writing MFX doesn't help me in any way because
a million C programmers will say: "All Forth code is worthless crap."
A million micro-controller programmers will say: "We are mighty smart
because we chose the ARM Cortex. You should do the same and be smart too!"
Claiming to have written a brilliant program in Forth is like claiming
to be the smartest student in Special Ed. (the one who doesn't drool).
As a practical matter, it doesn't matter if Tom Hart says that I'm
unqualified to work at any job ever again (what he currently says) or
if he says that I'm a brilliant Forth programmer --- because nobody
bothers to check the reference and ask his opinion --- they consider all
Forth programmers (myself, everybody at Testra, everybody on c.l.f., etc)
to be retards, because they have already seen the series of idiotic
Forth standards, each worse than the last. The failure to develop a
viable standard after 40 years is pretty damning for the Forth community!

The problem with Forth is a lack of leadership!
Or, perhaps, an excess of leadership --- everybody with one week of
experience joins the Forth-200x mailing list and spends the next few
decades talking about weird nonsense such as recognizers.

[dxforth]

The difference between the law and reality. In the example it took
the backing of the screen writers guild to get the credits reinstated
and I get the impression it wasn't easy. Few employees are going to
risk their job and reputation over a credit. OTOH a successful author
is likely to find publishers most accommodating.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

There is a lot of difference between writing a script for a movie
and writing a computer program. For one thing, software has both
source-code and executable code. It is not easy to obtain the
source-code given the executable. By comparison, it is easy to obtain
the script given the movie (just watch the movie and write down the
dialogue as you hear it).

In general, after you give somebody the source-code for software,
you no longer have any rights regarding that software. It is gone.
We recently had a thread discussing whether I have any rights
regarding my novice-package:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/DihLLsnxAi4

I said this regarding MFX:

On Tuesday, January 28, 2020 at 10:11:42 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> I should not have given Testra the source-code to MFX (the assembler,
> simulator and Forth cross-compiler for their MiniForth processor).
> I should have said:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> I will write this on my own personal computer and not get paid
> for my time in doing so, but you don't get the source-code.
> Compiling programs is a service, like a haircut. You pay every time.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> They may have agreed to the deal. Their backs were against the wall.
> At that time, Testra was pretty close to going out of business.
> Their 80c320 motion-control board was too slow to be competitive.
> Their major customer had switched to a competitor who had a
> MC68000 motion-control board programmed in C. They (actually John Hart)
> had the capability of creating a Forth processor, but they didn't have
> the capability of writing an assembler, simulator and cross-compiler.
> A processor without an assembler is still not competitive!
> If they decline the deal, then they go out of business. I don't care.
> Factory jobs pay $10/hour. Boredom is the problem, but other guys manage.
>
> What happened is that I wrote MFX for $10/hour (Tom Hart tried to talk
> me down to $8/hour but that was really below subsistence, so I said no).
> The MiniForth motion-control board was faster and cost less than the
> MC68000 board, so the customer returned, and other customers came.
> Testra continues to be very small, with only one employee (Steve Brault).
> They can't hire programmers that are capable of learning
> MFX assembly-language and are willing to put up with Tom Hart's ego
> Because they are small, they can't take on big jobs. Also, they can't

> upgrade MFX so they aren't getting full potential from the processor.
>

> I did this because I thought MFX was a stepping stone into a career
> in programming. Tom Hart had no concern for my future though.
> He has spent the last 25 years using MFX and saying that MFX was
> written in-house, and that Testra doesn't need outside programming help.
> He is embarrassed that Testra was in such dire straits that it needed
> outside programming help to pull the company through. He enjoys acting
> like a big-shot, and he won't admit that he has ever needed help.
> To conceal his own weakness, he is super-judgemental about other people.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 1:21:24 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 8:52:11 AM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 11:44:10 AM UTC-4, Ilya Tarasov wrote:
>
> > > A phrase I can support (from great Soviet actress Faina Ranevskaya).
> > > 'It is better to be a good person, 'swearing obscene' than a
> > > quiet, well-educated stinker'. So I prefer to deal with Hugh
> > > as long as he keeping honesty in his word than perform
> > > unfair intrigues around scrap of brilliant era of Forth.
> >
> > Can I ask if you write in English or your native tongue
> > and then translate it? I'm not trying to be insulting,
> > I'm asking an honest question. Sometimes the words you choose
> > seem unusual and I'm not sure of the meaning.
> > ...
> > I don't get what you mean by,
> > "around scrap of brilliant era of Forth".
>
> This is not a language problem --- you're just a dummkoph.
>
> The development of the MiniForth (1994-1995) was a pretty
> brilliant era of Forth. I'm not aware of anybody else who
> has succeeded in getting a processor to run on the
> Lattice 1048isp PLD --- maybe a toy processor that had no
> practical use --- the MiniForth was not a toy though; it
> provided better performance and lower cost than the MC68000
> board that the competitor in the laser-etching biz was using.
>
> The MiniForth was really the last hurrah of Forth,
> and then Forth died --- ANS-Forth put a stake through the
> heart of Forth --- Forth is unlikely to ever rise again.
>
> On the subject of fakes --- I think that you are faking your
> soft-core expertise. I will leave it to Ilya to comment on that
> though, as he knows more about the subject than I do.

This was an attack by Rick Collins on Testra and the MiniForth/RACE.
He says he doesn't know what the term "brilliant era of Forth"
could mean in regard to the MiniForth development in 1994/1995.
Unfair intrigues!

Here we have another thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/0lwaUpeiW7k
And unsurprisingly we have Rick Collins flinging more insulting lies
(saying that the MiniForth wasn't capable of parallelization):

On Friday, March 6, 2020 at 9:07:42 PM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
> On Friday, March 6, 2020 at 10:38:49 PM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > One poster Garth said this:
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> > According to a couple of ads I kept from back then,
> > the RTX2000 ran more than one Forth instruction per cycle,
> > typically about 16MIPS @ 12MHz, and peaked out at 50MIPS."
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> > That is quite an exaggeration! The MiniForth ran at 40 Mhz. and took
> > approximately 10 clock cycles per Forth word (that is a very loose
> > approximation as this varied quite a lot). That comes to 4 Forth MIPS.
> > There was also an 80 Mhz. version, which would be 8 Forth MIPS.
> > The RACE is several times faster, John Hart told me, but I haven't used it.
> > Getting 16 MIPS at 12 Mhz. is unrealistic, and 50 MIPS is way out there!
> > I think MIPS means: "Meaningless Information Provided by Salesmen."
> >
> > Note that you can't just run arbitrary Forth words in parallel, because
> > most of them have to be run in sequence. There are severe limitations.
> > I have experience with parallelization, because I wrote MFX.
> > I'm not interested in discussing the subject with people who have
> > no experience and are informed primarily by magazine advertisements.
>
> I just wanted to point out that the RTX2000 was indeed capable of
> faster than 1 "instruction" per clock cycle due to the instruction set
> allowing multiple operations being specified. At least "operations"
> that are typically Forth words. For example return is typically a
> separate instruction in processors as well as in Forth. This was
> the most commonly used instruction that could be paralleled
> with other instructions in the same opcode.
>
> There are others such as being able to specify a literal as part of
> an opcode performing other operations.
>
> There is a table of single instructions in the RTX2000 that equate to
> multiple Forth words.
>
> https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/stack_computers/sec4_5.html
>
> Scroll down to "Table 4.3(b) RTX 2000 Instruction Set Summary --
> Compound Forth Primitives"
>
> I'm a bit surprised you would not be more aware of the RTX2000.
> It has been discussed here quite a bit.
>
> Not sure why you would doubt what others can do in a CPU design
> simply because it is beyond what a company you worked for did.

The RTX2000 had a finite and very small number of parallelizations
of Forth words. These were "combos" in which two adjacent Forth words
became a single Forth word. This isn't actually parallelization because
these combos are just new words beyond the minimum set of words required
(the B16 with its 32 instructions is an example of the minimum required).
Quite a lot of processors can embed a small (usually 5-bit) literal
inside of the opcode, so the RTX2000 wasn't unique in this way.

The MiniForth had an assembly-language, so I could (and did) write
hundreds of Forth words, most of which were combos of common Forth words.
The assembly-language opcode executed in one clock cycle and executed
up to five instructions in parallel. I described earlier how my assembler
would rearrange the instructions to pack them efficiently into the opcodes
in such a way that their dependencies didn't get betrayed. These were
very low-level assembly instructions, not Forth words.
It is certainly possible to meta-compile a new primitive that performs
what several common Forth words would be needed for,
and all of that assembly-language gets mushed together
so it parallelizes to some extent --- also, data can be passed forward
in registers rather than in memory, which helps a lot.

The RTX2000 and the MiniForth were similar in that both the data-stack
and return-stack were in memory, so accessing the return-stack
can't be done in parallel with accessing the data-stack. Memory accesses
to data-memory have to be done in different clock cycles because
the data-bus and address-bus can only be used for one memory location
in each clock cycle.

The MiniForth was Harvard Architecture, meaning that it had code-memory
and data-memory. It could access code-memory to obtain the next opcode
in the same clock-cycle as it was accessing data-memory (where the
data-stack, return-stack, Forth threaded code and program data were located).
The RTX2000 was not Harvard Architecture. It needed separate clock cycles
for obtaining the next opcode and for accessing data.

I have noticed over the years that it is very common for sales clowns
to say that a processor does multiple actions in a single clock cycle.
This claim is almost never true. This claim is just a marketing gimmick!
You certainly can't access more than one memory location in the same
clock cycle unless they are in different memories each with their own
data bus and address bus. This should be obvious to anybody!

Writing MFX is something that I'm proud of.
It is sad that so many people want to take this source of pride away from me.
I suppose they just don't have any accomplishments of their own to be proud of.

[Peter Forth]

">I have noticed over the years that it is very common for sales clowns
>to say that a processor does multiple actions in a single clock cycle.
>This claim is almost never true. This claim is just a marketing gimmick!
>You certainly can't access more than one memory location in the same
>clock cycle unless they are in different memories each with their own
>data bus and address bus. This should be obvious to anybody! "

well this is exactly the trick, to have different registers on different buses
f.e. loading registers and alu instructions running in parallel because
they are separated physically they can do that without interfering in 1 cycle.

ON another post you mention a statement of Garth about the RTX2000 , obvioulsy
he copied that from an announce or leaflet, I remember that claim.

You have to take care because some of the MIPS they are refering
are Forth words, so they calculated that each of those forth words would
represent f.ex. 5 instructions on a common CISC processor, so
they multiplied 10 MIPS forth and obtained "bursts of 50 Mips"
of a comparative CISC processor.
This was explained by Charles Moore in one of his presentations or papers,
I think it was from the Novix times.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, March 7, 2020 at 2:16:52 PM UTC-7, Peter Forth wrote:
> ON another post you mention a statement of Garth about the RTX2000 , obvioulsy
> he copied that from an announce or leaflet, I remember that claim.
>
> You have to take care because some of the MIPS they are refering
> are Forth words, so they calculated that each of those forth words would
> represent f.ex. 5 instructions on a common CISC processor, so
> they multiplied 10 MIPS forth and obtained "bursts of 50 Mips"
> of a comparative CISC processor.
> This was explained by Charles Moore in one of his presentations or papers,
> I think it was from the Novix times.

Well, I said this above:

> > The MiniForth ran at 40 Mhz. and took
> > approximately 10 clock cycles per Forth word (that is a very loose
> > approximation as this varied quite a lot). That comes to 4 Forth MIPS.

So, according to the calculation method you described, a Forth word on
the MiniForth that has 10 opcodes (10 clock cycles) would require five
instructions on a CISC processor, so multiply my 4 MIPS by 5 to get
a whopping 20 MIPS. Whatever! Like I said, these numbers don't mean anything.
Much more important is how fast it runs your application that you are
trying to make money on --- in Testra's case, the motion-control program.
The MiniForth does have an assembly-language, so Pareto Analysis helps.
Find the 5% of the program that 95% of the time is spent in, and rewrite
that in assembly-language. This doesn't work on Forth processors such as
the B16, RTX2000, etc., that don't have an assembly-language but instead
have a small finite set of Forth primitives that everything is built on.

BTW: Please stop rattling Juergen Pintaske's cage.
He is riled up again. He attacks you, then you respond:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/nfg0b1bL5eE

Here you attack him, then he responds:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/u7tVPoGzy04

On Saturday, March 7, 2020 at 1:58:22 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> On Friday, 6 March 2020 22:03:12 UTC, Peter Forth wrote:
> > Publisihng on public forums, a private letter to Tesla about an employee
> > is another free sample of the kind of lack of moral of the thief of forth.
> > ...
> ...
> 3. Regarding Hugh Aguilar I warned Hugh on the same post,
> that I will send the email as posted in the post to Testra
> that I know from business activities,
> if he does not stop throwing shit at me.
> Hugh did give a monkies and so I sent the letter to Tom as in the post,
> asking Testra if I could publish the feedback from them -
> what they granted. Now Hugh is backpaddeling since then just showing
> what type of personality he is. He was my first Forth Killer
> with Peter second.

Juergen Pintaske attacks me, although I'm not even in thread.
I don't know what "monkies" means. I just told Juergen that his accusation
that I had claimed to have designed the Testra processor was not true,
then he told Tom Hart that I had claimed to have designed the Testra processor.
That is blatant lying. He was taking advantage of Tom Hart's paranoia
by filling Tom Hart's head with lies about me.
I also don't know what Juergen means when he says that I'm "back-peddling."

You are making the situation worse rather than better by
rattling Juergen Pintaske's cage. This just riles him up.
I have told you this elsewhere already:
(https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/0lwaUpeiW7k)

On Friday, March 6, 2020 at 8:38:49 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, March 6, 2020 at 3:17:08 PM UTC-7, Peter Forth wrote:
> > The scandal of publishing a private letter of Testra the employeer of
> > H. Aguilar, regards his employee on this open forum, shows Pintaske
> > is a complete mental ill person, and a dangerous liar.
>
> That wasn't a private letter from Tom Hart. It was an open letter
> that Tom Hart said he wanted posted on comp.lang.forth.
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/wydQr643gX0
>
> The scandal was that he lied to Tom Hart by saying that I had claimed
> to have designed the Testra processor when I never said any such
> thing, and I told him so clearly prior to him telling Tom Hart this lie.
> He was taking advantage of Tom Hart who is very old and has
> mental-health issues typical of old fools: paranoia, gullibility,
> arrogance, and can't remember the difference between CNC gcode and HPGL.
>
> I don't want you to be my champion and decry this "scandal."
> For one thing, you are getting your facts wrong (such as saying
> that it was a private letter posted publicly).
> For another thing, it isn't really any of your business.
> Why don't you just stop worrying about Juergen Pintaske?
> Juergen Pintaske is a pig, but why is that your concern?

Please don't try to be my champion and decry this scandal.
You don't really know what you are talking about, and it isn't your business.

[Peter Forth]

Well then you are asking the wrong thing to the wrong person
if you look at the forum, I am not present on CLF since ages,
I use to read CLF once in a week, or when a theme is interesting
like the fixed point discussion was.

Somebody posted asking for a book, that is probably within our
growing free books of forth link collection (not only me, many friends
from all over the world are helping to build and maintain)
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/u7tVPoGzy04
where all this shit started again.
I do not mention Pintaske, I am only responding to a person in this
forum, when all the atacks to my person start again.

Of course I am not defending you, this is up to you.
My point is that Pintaskes letter to Testra is another
demonstration how ill this guy is.

Nobody sane will publish an employer letter on a public forum, even if
somebody asks you. He provoked the other part, your employer to write this
letter. Of course you know all the details better,
is not my interest to get involved into private things.

My point is Pintaske went after an excuse to degrading a person.
In this case it was you, or me, or some of my friends, who will be the next?

What is this stupid slogan of "forthkiller" he invented, he should look
at the mirror, to see the worst forthkiller. Nothing beter to show
his paranoia.

He throws the stone and hides the hand, will he still find stupids that
believe he is inocent ?

He is manipulating people all the time, as he did with the foolish
post of Stephen Pelc accusing me of Criminal, because I had a link
to a public open site of books, with one of his books.
Who ended looking like another mental ? Stephen Pelc, by imitating
the ill behaviour and paranoia of Pintaske.

*****************************************************************************
My interest is that everyone in this forum, and in the planet, knows
the type Pintaske is. He is a professional slanderer, a defamer that pretends
to smear everybody with his lies.
*****************************************************************************

And how should I call a person that robbs PD Forth books to make money
out of them ?
How will we get in future new authors interested in making PD Forth
publications with that example ?
Nobody cares of the destruction to open source Forth (promoting MPE products)
and open source interchange this ill man has done ?

After his insults he posts a long list of public domain books of forth
that now , have his face and his name as he would be the 3rd wise man of
programming. When everybody knows he is a complete idiot without programming
or any kind of technical education, that asks for help on the RPI forums
how to install Raspbian, or how to program in forth 4 rc servos, from a toy
arm pretended for 8 year old childs.
He has completly stained forth reputation forever,
because anybody with basic understanding knows such an idiot guy
can´t write even the index of the books he is publishing
and in fact, he dellivers the books without index !

Whenever Pintaske appears insulting me , I will respond.

[Jurgen Pitaske]

Just look at the heap of shit Peter Fart has generated over the last 6 months.

Well – just scroll down on CLF to see who this unperson is and posts

JUERGEN PINTASKE COMPLETELY DETONATED ON HACKADAY FORUM - Peter Fart

masturbate with the books of Charles Moore and Dr. Ting by Juergen Pintaske - Peter Fart

CROOKED THIEF PINTASKE OWNS "FORTH" AND THREATENS ALL THE FORTH COMMUNITY - Peter Fart

Copyright infringement - Stephen Pelc

JUERGEN PINTASKE the proof how he lies to the whole forth community , he is a scammer and the worst liar - Peter Fart

-- How to Upload a Book to-- the free Forth Bookshelf -- or create your own collection -- - Fake Fart

Juergen Pintarschloch fired from MPE replaced by a cute dog Barto Gillespie no more Krauts Pintaske - Peter Fart

UNSHAMED JUERGEN PINTASKE SELLING ROTTEN FISH AGAIN : FREE AVAILABLE PDFs – Identity Thief Fart

Charles H. Moore "Programming A Problem Oriented Language" the original book, not the fake marketing Amazon copy of Pintaske - - Peter Fart

Colateral effect : Diseducation on Forth and english from disaster books of J. Pintaske - multiple Identity Thief Peter Fake


WARNING: WATCH OUT FOR IDENTITY THIEVES ON CLF https://www.facebook.com/peter.forth.583
In addition to just a copyright criminal, Peter Forsau is now stealing identities as well and posts whatever he feels like
In their name but - everybody can quite simply check this via the IP address where the post comes from.
Mental disturbance at its best, hopefully leading to walls around him soon.
As he hates the Forth Bookshelf I created so much, this link is probably the best verifier at the end of my posts
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Juergen-Pintaske/e/B00N8HVEZM


Have a nice day

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 1:15:43 PM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> On Monday, 11 November 2019 04:39:56 UTC, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Stephen Pelc's employee Juergen Pintaske apparently does.
>
> BULLSHIT
>
> > He went to a lot of effort to attack me, and attack Testra indirectly.
>
> BULLSHIT - I warned you a few times but did not care
> - so you can read your time at Testra for the rest of your life.
>
> > He continues to say that I was fired for incompetence and
> > that MFX doesn't work, and imply that the Testra processor doesn't
> > work either ---
>
> BULLSHIT again
>
> this is what Stephen Pelc pays him to do.
>
> BULLSHIT AGAIN - I stopped consulting for MPE 6 months ago - actually he calmed me down quite a few times after you threw your vitriol around again.
>
> NOW I AM FREE AND CAN CALL YOU THE ARSEHOLE that you are.

Juergen Pintaske claims that he is no longer employed as a salesman
for Stephen Pelc at MPE.

He is spamming the Hackaday forum with advertisements for MPE though:
https://hackaday.com/2018/02/22/forth-system-on-chip-takes-us-back-to-the-80s/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A Start With Forth says:
February 23, 2018 at 12:31 am

MPE offers VFX as Commercial Compiler, but there are as well free versions
VFXTESTAPP.exe for Windows PC as part of A Start With Forth
https://wiki.forth-ev.de/doku.php/en:projects:a-start-with-forth:start0
– no installation, just download the exe and as well free versions
for MSP 430 and ARM boards, the LITE Vesrions are at
http://www.mpeforth.com/cortex-and-msp430-stamp-and-lite-compilers/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that Juergen Pintaske is still employed at MPE as a salesman.
Stephen Pelc has never said that Juergen Pintaske is not still employed
at MPE, although he did remove Juergen Pintaske's bio from the employee
list on the MPE website after Juergen Pintaske began calling MPE
competitors "masturbators" (a pretty crude insult, even by MPE standards).

I think that Stephen Pelc ordered his employee Juergen Pintaske to do
what he could to make Testra and their processor look bad, for the purpose of
making MPE's "clean room implementation" of the RTX-2000 look relatively good.
This plan worked out pretty well.
Juergen Pintaske was able to take advantage of Tom Hart's paranoia
and gullibility to convince Tom Hart that I was claiming to have designed
the Testra processor, although I have never claimed any such thing.
This resulted in Tom Hart attacking me, which makes Testra look bad.
I wrote MFX, so if Tom Hart says I'm incompetent (he did), this implies
that MFX doesn't work and that Testra doesn't have an assembler/simulator
and Forth cross-compiler for their processor (after 25 years!).

I think that, ultimately, these "unfair intrigues" show that Stephen Pelc
does not strive to compete by making his products better, but instead
he focuses on making his competitors look worse than they actually are.
This is also the purpose of crippling the Forth-200x Standard.
Stephen Pelc considers the Forth community to be customers, but if
you don't buy his product (hundreds of dollars), then he will use
every trick that he knows to discredit you and make you look incompetent.

Peter Forth hates Juergen Pintaske. This is foolishness though!
This is like hating an attack dog because it bit you.
It would make more sense to hate the dog's master that trained it to attack
and commanded it to attack. Dogs aren't responsible for their actions.

[Jurgen Pitaske]

What a wonderful self portrait by Hugh Aguiar
unfortunately he gets the facts wrong again -
probably by mistake?

Let’s waste some time to comment regarding each lie separately:

On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 1:15:43 PM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> On Monday, 11 November 2019 04:39:56 UTC, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

NUMBER 1 The facts by Juergen Pintaske – :

In November 2019 I was NOT an employee of MPE anymore.
as I had stated anyway. And he very well knows.

Actually I never was an employee of MPE
– I supported MPE as consultant
My work for MPE stopped in March 2019 after about 5 years
– not too bad.

MPE was a great company to work for – but nothing lasts forever,
except for the Forth Bookshelf on amazon,
which I did in parallel and to support Forth and MPE

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Juergen-Pintaske/e/B00N8HVEZM
and I continue working on it.

> > Stephen Pelc's employee Juergen Pintaske apparently does.
>
> BULLSHIT
>

NUMBER 2 The facts by Juergen Pintaske:
I never attacked Testra,
Actually Testra was very kind to allow the community to learn about the truth – Hugh backpadelling since then

> > He went to a lot of effort to attack me, and attack Testra indirectly.
>
> BULLSHIT - I warned you a few times but did not care
> - so you can read your time at Testra for the rest of your life.

NUMBER 3 The facts by Juergen Pintaske :
Read the original posted letter from Testra yourself
– no team player – so employment at Tesra had to stop.

> > He continues to say that I was fired for incompetence and
> > that MFX doesn't work, and imply that the Testra processor doesn't
> > work either ---
>

NUMBER 4 The facts by Juergen Pintaske:
IF any of his work actually does its job or not
I cannot judge and actually do not care.

And this Testra letter activity
was AFTER the consultancy work for MPE ended,
and then I was free to call you the personality you are
– I was not related to MPE anymore.

> BULLSHIT again
>
> this is what Stephen Pelc pays him to do.

NUMBER 5 The facts by Juergen Pintaske :
The timings are known but does not fit his rants ...

>
> BULLSHIT AGAIN - I stopped consulting for MPE 6 months ago - actually he calmed me down quite a few times after you threw your vitriol around again.
>
> NOW I AM FREE AND CAN CALL YOU THE ARSEHOLE that you are.

Juergen Pintaske claims that he is no longer employed as a salesman
for Stephen Pelc at MPE.

Number 6 The facts by Juergen Pintaske :
I am posting wherever I like,
and if you open your eyes and read what was posted there,
MPE is only part of it and
MPE is still one of the few Forth Software Suppliers there are.
And at this time in 2018 I still did consultancy for MPE
as the date February 23, 2018 at 12:31 proves

He is spamming the Hackaday forum with advertisements for MPE though:
https://hackaday.com/2018/02/22/forth-system-on-chip-takes-us-back-to-the-80s/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A Start With Forth says:
February 23, 2018 at 12:31 am

MPE offers VFX as Commercial Compiler, but there are as well free versions
VFXTESTAPP.exe for Windows PC as part of A Start With Forth
https://wiki.forth-ev.de/doku.php/en:projects:a-start-with-forth:start0
– no installation, just download the exe and as well free versions
for MSP 430 and ARM boards, the LITE Vesrions are at
http://www.mpeforth.com/cortex-and-msp430-stamp-and-lite-compilers/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that Juergen Pintaske is still employed at MPE as a salesman.

Number 7 The facts by Juergen Pintaske|:
As usual you make up your lies as you go along.

:

Stephen Pelc has never said that Juergen Pintaske is not still employed
at MPE, although he did remove Juergen Pintaske's bio from the employee
list on the MPE website after Juergen Pintaske began calling MPE
competitors "masturbators" (a pretty crude insult, even by MPE standards).

NUMBER 8 The facts by Juergen Pintaske :
Fake news as usual: Stephen cleaned up a lot more at the time
and other pics and bios disappeared as well
– it is MPE’s website – so MPE’s decision what is there.

How much you throw shit at Testra here is obvious …
part of your backpaddeling to obfuscate the facts.

I think that Stephen Pelc ordered his employee Juergen Pintaske to do
what he could to make Testra and their processor look bad, for the purpose of
making MPE's "clean room implementation" of the RTX-2000 look relatively good.
This plan worked out pretty well.
Juergen Pintaske was able to take advantage of Tom Hart's paranoia
and gullibility to convince Tom Hart that I was claiming to have designed
the Testra processor, although I have never claimed any such thing.
This resulted in Tom Hart attacking me, which makes Testra look bad.
I wrote MFX, so if Tom Hart says I'm incompetent (he did), this implies
that MFX doesn't work and that Testra doesn't have an assembler/simulator
and Forth cross-compiler for their processor (after 25 years!).

Number 9 The facts by Juergen Pintaske:
MPE is a software company and decides what is good for them
- as any other company does.
In contrast you are a sole programmer, tractor driver, plumber –
probably out of work at the moment
as you spend so much time posting such rants.

I think that, ultimately, these "unfair intrigues" show that Stephen Pelc
does not strive to compete by making his products better, but instead
he focuses on making his competitors look worse than they actually are.

Number 10 The facts by Juergen Pintaske :
I wonder where you take the arrogance from
to comment on the Standard.
Look at the participants who spend their spare time here.

This is more of a European project, as the only name from the USA
mentioned is Leon from Forth Inc.
( I wonder why your name is not mentioned there
as you are contributing so much … )

This is also the purpose of crippling the Forth-200x Standard.
Stephen Pelc considers the Forth community to be customers, but if
you don't buy his product (hundreds of dollars), then he will use
every trick that he knows to discredit you and make you look incompetent.

NUMBER 11 The facts by Juergen Pintaske :
Your knowledge about dogs is laughable but made me smile.

[Jurgen Pitaske]

Just out of interest I had a look at who actually contributes to this often discussed Forth Standard.
I was surprised to see that it seems to be a mostly European activity?
Only one person from the USA.

Forth Standard Committee
– copied from the current document on 12 March 2020 from
https://forth-standard.org/standard/index

Worldwide Participants:

Stephen Pelc (Chair)
Bernd Paysan (Treasure)
Dr. Peter Knaggs (Editor)
Gerald Wodni (Technical)

Russia Prof. Sergey Baranov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SPIIRAS
ra oo e@g ca v .g ano l om l mbsn i St. Petersburg, Russia

UK Paul E. Bennet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Independent Member ed18c:b
lin tBl cn p_ u. e k.E t teu @ ao .oaP m Exeter, UK

South Africa Willem Botha . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Construction Computer Software (Pty) Ltd
c@hl mot aa .l c.m ssc oe biw Cape Town, South Africa

Austria Dr. M. Anton Ertl. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technische Universität Wien
tpn ns. w ett co nao gim il upm a.@an . Wien, Austria

UK Andrew Haley. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Red Hat UK Ltd.
r .c@ e hat oh da mp Cambridge, UK

Germany Dr. Ulrich Hoffmann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FH Wedel
@ h . ed-to vf r eohu Wedel, Germany

Germany Dr. Peter Knaggs (Editor) . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .
Independent Member
@ . ksc ugk .rop bj Trowbridge, UK

UK / Germany Howerd Oakford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventio Software Ltd c:b
e .ucnw i ie td k@ onv o.o rh Wolfsburg, Germany

Germany Bernd Paysan (Treasure) . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net2o
en ad n .d@sp xgmr ayb .e Munich, Germany

UK Stephen Pelc (Chair) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd.
n foh ce r .e hp t om m@e pts Southampton, UK

USA Leon Wagner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FORTH, Inc.
mf r .to@o cn ohel Los Angeles, USA

Austria Gerald Wodni (Technical) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Independent Member
d toa dr ni@w a.g le Wien, Austria

The following organizations and individuals have also
participated in this project as committee members.

The committee recognizes and respects their contributions:
members-2x xi 200x Membership Forth 200x / 18.1

Spain Federico de Ceballos. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Universidad de Cantabria
u. le o .l n@d ec ic eb noa s ar sife c Santander, Spain

Germany Simon Kaphahn . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Independent Member
m . e_ gm 9K 9 xn @ dS oi Munich, Germany

UK Dr. Bill Stoddart . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Teesside University
oi cad amr. .g@ts d mlotw j. Middlesbrough, UK

Germany Dr. Willi Stricker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Independent Member
n-r c t@ dee .wk i_r o ln est i Springe, Germany

Germany Carsten Strotmann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Independent Member
s nr n tte .rs @t n do am eac Neuenkirchen, Germany

The committee would like to thank
the following contributors:

John Hayes
Marcel Hendrix
Gerry Jackson
Alex McDonald
Bruce McFarling
Charles G. Montgomery
Krishna Myneni
Howerd Oakford
Tim Partridge
Elizabeth Rather
David N. Williams

[Stephen Pelc]

On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:10:22 -0700 (PDT), hughag...@gmail.com
wrote:

>I think that Juergen Pintaske is still employed at MPE as a salesman.
>Stephen Pelc has never said that Juergen Pintaske is not still employed
>at MPE,

Juergen left MPE about six month ago. He no longer works for MPE.

I'm not going to comment on Hugh's fantasies.

I'm busy writing new products.

Stephen

--
Stephen Pelc, ste...@mpeforth.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
web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads

[Peter Forth]

Of course I do not hate anybody in the Forth community, I do not
hate Pintaske. I simply consider he has assaulted the Public Domain
forth bibliography and has copyrighted under his name, using scams.

As professional scammer he is , he tells the tale that
"He is rescuing forth from the hands of "forthkillers".
A disguice to continue unpunished his acts of robbery.

Lots of PD docs. are now copyrighted under his brandname
EXEMARK, and he wanted to sue me for sharing POL of Charles Moore for
16000 U$S. He calculated how much clicks Amazon loses because of my site
with free forth books (links)...
With this terrible example who will want to donate his work for
free in the future ?

What should I do, applaud that sordid act ?

Are you serious ? I am the foolish ? I simply wanted to share book links
in the PD to newcomers to forth, that contacted me through
the Win32forth site, and my videos, etc.

Remember where this started on FB 21st century forum, who Pintaske owns
or Stephen Pelc , really don´t care if both own that.

Pintaske did all what is possible to expulse me, because
I was posting about my progress on Win32forth. Telling users
to look at Win32forth, to write their programs and learn forth.
With the aim to expand a friendly community of forthers.

When I returned to Forth a bit more than 3 years ago, I learned to
program under Windows, thanks the guys of the Yahoo Win32f group.
They had very low trafic when I met them again, most of the participants
where gone or had no more contact with forth.
I did videos, promoted on FB, and as consequence I found new forth friends,
I learned very much and I am most thankful to who collaborated for free
on that great project.

But you see clear, you told exactly what happened here. Pintaske
is the salesman of MPE, and he went mad because Forth21 forum was
intended to sale MPE products. When I started posting about
Win32forth, the stupid ill man,started his bulliying , insults,
scams, everything people know him uses to do and he was sucsessful
most of the time.

Lots of people write to me about who Mr.Pintaske is. People who
know him very well, personally also.
They describe him like a piece of shit, and they tell me to let
that shit go.

He has robbed all free PDFs from the Forth communtiy ,and he has
stained all Forth authors Dr. Ting , Charles Moore, Hantlass, B.Rodriguez
Dr. Mainzer from German Amsat, and all the rest,
mixing their names with a plettora of insults on public forums.

Something, that Google has appropriatedly entangled where it belongs
to the lowest places of vulgarity.

This is another free sample of how idiot this german clown is.
He is a vulgar person that does not know the basics
of computer technology or internet. He has any idea the damage
he has done to Forth. Even so , he thinks in his perturbed mind
he is making well in selling aged books of >40 years -- at 10 Euros --
that are free to get in 3 seconds, using either my site
or a search on Google !

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Pelc is now giving his software free out, Pintaske has destroyed
his reputation, like a Panzer that detonates all what is in front, he never
stops.
Pintaske is not the dog of Pelc, Pintaske is the --Armagedon of MPE--.
So if somebody really hates Pelc, he should send Pintaske 2 boxes
of the best Wine, to celebrate the damage he has done to Pelc´s
reputation.
But also to the guys of german Fig, who had to create a new site
to take all the vomits and the infection of Pintaske out of their place.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

You described Pintaske as a Frankenstein monster. And Pelc his father/creator.

An excellent metaphor :
you used to describe the destruction of a brainless monster
to the forth village with his rants .Another wonderful coincidence
that the brain of Frankenstein was from a
thief ! this explains why Pintaske is 100% dedicated to robbery.

[dxforth]

On Friday, March 13, 2020 at 2:33:34 AM UTC+11, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> ...

> I never attacked Testra,
> Actually Testra was very kind to allow the community to learn about the truth – Hugh backpadelling since then

Hart stated *if there was to be any quoting* it had to be "all or nothing".
He was protecting himself against selective quoting which is fair enough
given it was a fishing expedition. I saw nothing in Hart's response we
didn't already know, suspect, or particularly damning. Hugh being hard
to get on with is hardly news.

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, March 12, 2020 at 10:48:44 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:10:22 -0700 (PDT), hughag...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> >I think that Juergen Pintaske is still employed at MPE as a salesman.
> >Stephen Pelc has never said that Juergen Pintaske is not still employed
> >at MPE,
>
> Juergen left MPE about six month ago. He no longer works for MPE.

Why tell me, but not tell Tom Hart?
When I visited in September of 2019, Tom Hart told me that
Juergen Pintaske was employed at MPE.

I think that Tom Hart believed that MPE was considering buying
the Testra processor, and that he needed to attack me on comp.lang.forth
to make Juergen Pintaske (MPE salesman) happy. This is the "business"
between MPE and Testra that Juergen Pintaske mentioned earlier in this thread.
This business never came to anything though --- you were just tugging
on Tom Hart's chain --- got him excited for nothing!

> I'm not going to comment on Hugh's fantasies.
>
> I'm busy writing new products.

Stephen Pelc's idea of a "new product" is to do a "clean-room implementation"
(reverse engineering) of somebody else's product.
He doesn't do his own R&D. He gets somebody else's R&D without paying for it.

On Sunday, November 3, 2019 at 10:46:03 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Stephen Pelc also says this on his website:
> --------------------------------------------
> The RTXcore is a VHDL clean-room implementation of the
> Intersil RTX-2000 for FPGAs. It runs the same instruction set,
> but twice as fast on a Xilinx Spartan. An an on-chip UART as well as
> the original peripherals are provided.
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Stephen Pelc wants the Forthers of the world to believe that he is
> the master of soft-core Forth processors. He did a
> "clean-room implementation of the Intersil RTX-2000," meaning that
> he didn't pay Intersil for their design. He got the R&D done for free
> using the same "clean-room implementation" technique that Red China uses.
> The RTX-2000 was actually not competitive with the MiniForth in 1994,
> and Stephen Pelc's "twice as fast" version isn't competitive with the
> RACE today, which is several times faster than the MiniForth of 1994.
> Stephen Pelc can't compete with Testra on a technical basis, so he
> instead strives to drag Testra through the mud on comp.lang.forth.

[Jurgen Pitaske]

What an ugly character Peter Fart is.

Over the last years he started it again and again.

Here and in other places.

He asks for it with a useless thread:


and is surprised as he gets an answer.

At least he lives in the Brasilian jungle and cannot do much damage there.
A self selected or enforced closed environment probably based on his mental status.

Biology unfortunately allows for idiots and fake personalities like him.

Forth is great, and sufficiently strong to survive spammers like him.

He got thrown out of the Forth Facebook group as result of his ugly behaviour,
so he started his own Forth group

But

it is sure that he will die

that I will die

But as fourth item
I have organized already that the Forth Bookshelf
( now including some BASIC and Python as well - even a basic hexadecimal system MyCo )
will survive and serve many more people in the future.

Many times when Peter Fart has his moments, people search for my name and as result buy some items from the Forth Bookshelf - additional promotion for Forth.

It started with eBooks that I published and promoted – relatively low cost, easy worldwide delivery.
Many of them are now available as Print Books as well, with one of them actually converted to print as result of a request on the facebook group – print books are easier to read and you can flick through and enjoy as part of your book collection.

The current Forth Bookshelf can be found at
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Juergen-Pintaske/e/B00N8HVEZM

And I can be proud as I have - as part of this - collected and published the most recent Forth Book:
A Start With Forth

or is there another one?

- thanks to all of the contributors who helped to make it happen -
and you can find most of it here:

https://wiki.forth-ev.de/doku.php/en:projects:a-start-with-forth:start0

And the full collection of the Forth Bookshelf:

1 Charles Moore - Forth - The Early Years: Background information about the beginnings of this Computer Language
2P Charles Moore - Programming A Problem Oriented Language: Forth - how the internals work
3 Leo Brodie - Starting Forth -The Classic
4P Leo Wong – Juergen Pintaske – Stephen Pelc FORTH LITE TUTORIAL: Code tested with free MPE VFX Forth, SwiftForth and Gforth or else
5P Juergen Pintaske – A START WITH FORTH - Bits to Bites Collection – 12 Words to start, then 35 Words, Javascript Forth on the Web, more
6P Stephen Pelc - Programming Forth: Version July 2016
7P Brad Rodriguez - Moving Forth / TTL CPU / B.Y.O. Assembler
8P Tim Hentlass - Real Time Forth

9P Chen-Hanson Ting - Footsteps In An Empty Valley issue 3
10 Chen-Hanson Ting - Zen and the Forth Language: EFORTH for the MSP430G2552 from Texas Instruments
11 Chen-Hanson Ting - eForth and Zen - 3rd Edition 2017: with 32-bit 86eForth v5.2 for Visual Studio 2015
12 Chen-Hanson Ting - eForth Overview
13 Chen-Hanson Ting - FIG-Forth Manual Document /Test in 1802 IP
14 Chen-Hanson Ting - EP32 RISC Processor IP: Description and Implementation into FPGA – ASIC tested by NASA
15 Chen-Hanson Ting – Irriducible Complexity
16P Chen-Hanson Ting - Arduino controlled by eForth

17 Burkhard Kainka - Learning Programming with MyCo: Learning Programming easily - independent of a PC
18P Burkhard Kainka - BBC Micro:bit: Tests Tricks Secrets Code, Additional MicroBit information when running the Mecrisp Package
19 Burkhard Kainka – Thomas Baum – Web Programming ATYTINY13
20P Georg Heinrichs - The ATTINY Project
21P Prof. Dr. Karl Meinzer – IPS – A Forth-like Language for Space

Is anybody interested in those “old” books?
It seems there is …
Check it yourself in the top 100 here
Best Sellers in Compiler Design
https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/3970/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_b_1_5_last#5
on 08/08/2019 - different today:

1 Charles Moore - Forth - The Early Years: Background information about the beginnings of this Computer Language

( 55 ) 2P Charles Moore - Programming A Problem Oriented Language: Forth - how the internals work

3 Leo Brodie - Starting Forth -The Classic

4P Leo Wong – Juergen Pintaske – Stephen Pelc FORTH LITE TUTORIAL: Code tested with free MPE VFX Forth, SwiftForth and Gforth or else

( 80 ) 5P Juergen Pintaske – A START WITH FORTH - Bits to Bites Collection – 12 Words to start, then 35 Words, Javascript Forth on the Web, more
( 6 ) 6P Stephen Pelc - Programming Forth: Version July 2016
( 63 ) 7P Brad Rodriguez - Moving Forth / TTL CPU / B.Y.O. Assembler
8P Tim Hentlass - Real Time Forth

( 85 ) 9P Chen-Hanson Ting - Footsteps In An Empty Valley issue 3
10 Chen-Hanson Ting - Zen and the Forth Language: EFORTH for the MSP430G2552 from Texas Instruments
( 66 ) 11 Chen-Hanson Ting - eForth and Zen - 3rd Edition 2017: with 32-bit 86eForth v5.2 for Visual Studio 2015
( 94 ) 12 Chen-Hanson Ting - eForth Overview
( 71 ) 13 Chen-Hanson Ting - FIG-Forth Manual Document /Test in 1802 IP
14 Chen-Hanson Ting - EP32 RISC Processor IP: Description and Implementation into FPGA – ASIC tested by NASA
15 Chen-Hanson Ting – Irriducible Complexity
( 7 ) 16P Chen-Hanson Ting - Arduino controlled by eForth

17 Burkhard Kainka - Learning Programming with MyCo: Learning Programming easily - independent of a PC
18P Burkhard Kainka - BBC Micro:bit: Tests Tricks Secrets Code, Additional MicroBit information when running the Mecrisp Package
19 Burkhard Kainka – Thomas Baum – Web Programming ATYTINY13
( 93 ) 20P Georg Heinrichs - The ATTINY Project
21P Prof. Dr. Karl Meinzer – IPS – A Forth-like Language for Space

[Rick C]

On Friday, March 13, 2020 at 1:50:49 PM UTC-4, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
>
> What an ugly character Peter Fart is.

There is nothing pretty about any part of this pointless bickering by adolescents in this group. All of you continue to tear down Forth equally, but each claims the moral high ground.

A plague o' both your houses!

Do you ever calm down and see how pointless it is to rant and rave like a madman when dealing with rabid dogs?

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, March 13, 2020 at 11:23:02 AM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
> On Friday, March 13, 2020 at 1:50:49 PM UTC-4, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> >
> > What an ugly character Peter Fart is.
>
> There is nothing pretty about any part of this pointless bickering
> by adolescents in this group.
> All of you continue to tear down Forth equally,
> but each claims the moral high ground.
>
> A plague o' both your houses!
>
> Do you ever calm down and see how pointless it is to rant and rave
> like a madman when dealing with rabid dogs?

There is nothing pretty about Rick Collins. He is a nasty little troll!
Here he is pretending to be the voice of reason. LOL
Recently though, he attacked the MiniForth/RACE:

On Friday, March 6, 2020 at 9:07:42 PM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
> On Friday, March 6, 2020 at 10:38:49 PM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> > ...

> > Note that you can't just run arbitrary Forth words in parallel, because
> > most of them have to be run in sequence. There are severe limitations.
> > I have experience with parallelization, because I wrote MFX.
> > I'm not interested in discussing the subject with people who have
> > no experience and are informed primarily by magazine advertisements.
>
> I just wanted to point out that the RTX2000 was indeed capable of
> faster than 1 "instruction" per clock cycle due to the instruction set
> allowing multiple operations being specified. At least "operations"
> that are typically Forth words. For example return is typically a
> separate instruction in processors as well as in Forth. This was
> the most commonly used instruction that could be paralleled
> with other instructions in the same opcode.
>
> There are others such as being able to specify a literal as part of
> an opcode performing other operations.
>
> There is a table of single instructions in the RTX2000 that equate to
> multiple Forth words.
>
> https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/stack_computers/sec4_5.html
>
> Scroll down to "Table 4.3(b) RTX 2000 Instruction Set Summary --
> Compound Forth Primitives"
>
> I'm a bit surprised you would not be more aware of the RTX2000.
> It has been discussed here quite a bit.
>
> Not sure why you would doubt what others can do in a CPU design
> simply because it is beyond what a company you worked for did.

Rick Collins is exactly the type of troll I was referring to when I said:
> > I'm not interested in discussing the subject with people who have
> > no experience and are informed primarily by magazine advertisements.

Rick Collins is a total fake!

He says:
> I just wanted to point out that the RTX2000 was indeed capable of
> faster than 1 "instruction" per clock cycle due to the instruction set
> allowing multiple operations being specified. At least "operations"
> that are typically Forth words. For example return is typically a
> separate instruction in processors as well as in Forth.

This is utterly retarded!
The RTX-2000 has the data-stack and return-stack in RAM, and there
is only one memory (data-bus and address-bus). The EXIT accesses
the return-stack, so it can't execute in the same clock cycle as any
instruction that accesses the data-stack, which is most or all of them.

I think that Rick Collins knows exactly nothing about how processors
work internally. He doesn't understand that there are severe limitations
on what can be parallelized. Certainly, instructions that access memory
can't be parallelized with each other!
Also, register dependencies imply sequential execution.
Rick Collins is informed entirely by reading magazine advertisements.
Salesmen often say that multiple instructions are executing in one clock cycle.
Rick Collins doesn't know that this is just sales blather.
Rick Collins is a total fake! He doesn't know anything about the subject.
He pretends great expertise, but he often makes ultra-novice-level mistakes.

I didn't know anything about parallelization either, when I started at Testra.
I learned on the way.
One of the things that I learned, was to not fake expertise if I didn't
actually know what I was talking about --- that turkey flies on c.l.f.,
but to write code that actually works you have to know your subject.

Stephen Pelc is another fake.
He doesn't know how FIND works in ANS-Forth, and he doesn't know that
the disambiguifiers make FIND work in a consistent manner (and not crash)
so FIND becomes usable. My SYNONYM and MACRO: both depend on FIND being fixed.
Once again, to write working code you have to know your subject!
Can Stephen Pelc write SYNONYM and and early-binding MACRO: in ANS-Forth? No!
He is also faking expertise in string-stacks, and has no working code.
Stephen Pelc's primary (only) goal is to sell VFX for big money.
He is the worst possible candidate to lead Forth-200x because any
Forth standard is a competitor to VFX. Certainly, VFX can't be sold
unless it is better than the standard Forth, meaning that the standard
Forth has been crippled with non-working code (the Paysan-faked quotations)
and general idiocy in order to prevent it from being used professionally.

Peter Knaggs was faking expertise in linked-lists, but failed badly.
Andrew Haley was faking expertise in the SWITCH construct, but failed badly.
All of the Forth-200x committee members are fakes!

[Melzzzzz]

On 2020-03-14, hughag...@gmail.com <hughag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> on what can be parallelized. Certainly, instructions that access memory
> can't be parallelized with each other!

Wrong.

> Also, register dependencies imply sequential execution.

Yes. That is why one schedule instructions if possible.

> Rick Collins is informed entirely by reading magazine advertisements.
> Salesmen often say that multiple instructions are executing in one clock cycle.

Happens if data is in cache or if instructions don't access main memory.

--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
U ničemu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec
Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec
Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi
bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala

[Rick C]

On Saturday, March 14, 2020 at 1:34:31 AM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On 2020-03-14, hughag...@gmail.com <hughag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > on what can be parallelized. Certainly, instructions that access memory
> > can't be parallelized with each other!
>
> Wrong.
>
> > Also, register dependencies imply sequential execution.
>
> Yes. That is why one schedule instructions if possible.
>
>
> > Rick Collins is informed entirely by reading magazine advertisements.
> > Salesmen often say that multiple instructions are executing in one clock cycle.
>
> Happens if data is in cache or if instructions don't access main memory.

Please, when people reply with pointless comments it is pointless to try to explain that to them.

It should be very clear that when I made a post about the RTX2000 and only about the RTX2000 which Hugh characterizes as "he attacked the MiniForth/RACE"... there is literally no way to dissuade Hugh of his delusions.

I'm sorry I made any post in this thread. I hope this one doesn't have the same negative impact my first post did.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Friday, March 13, 2020 at 10:34:31 PM UTC-7, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On 2020-03-14, hughag...@gmail.com <hughag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > on what can be parallelized. Certainly, instructions that access memory
> > can't be parallelized with each other!
>
> Wrong.
>
> > Also, register dependencies imply sequential execution.
>
> Yes. That is why one schedule instructions if possible.
>
>
> > Rick Collins is informed entirely by reading magazine advertisements.
> > Salesmen often say that multiple instructions are executing in one clock cycle.
>
> Happens if data is in cache or if instructions don't access main memory.

The MiniForth didn't have a data-cache. This was 1994!

I said:
"instructions that access memory can't be parallelized with each other!"

You tell me that instructions that don't access main memory, but only
access registers, can be parallelized. I actually know that.
I find it very annoying when people educate me on kindergarten concepts.

I wrote the MFX assembler that rearranged the instructions for out-of-order
execution to maximize parallelization while still guaranteeing that
the program did the same thing that it would have done if the instructions
had been assembled one per opcode in the same order that they appeared
in the source-code. That is my experience with parallelization.
What have you written? Why are you qualified to educate me on the subject?

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, March 12, 2020 at 10:48:44 AM UTC-7, Stephen Pelc wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:10:22 -0700 (PDT), hughag...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> >I think that Juergen Pintaske is still employed at MPE as a salesman.
> >Stephen Pelc has never said that Juergen Pintaske is not still employed
> >at MPE,
>
> Juergen left MPE about six month ago. He no longer works for MPE.
>
> I'm not going to comment on Hugh's fantasies.
>
> I'm busy writing new products.
>
> Stephen

I don't care if you write new products and sell them.
MPE is a business, so that is what you are supposed to do.
I do care that you are purposely squelching the Forth community
by presenting Forth-200x as the one-and-only Forth standard,
and simultaneously crippling Forth-200x with crap code so that
it won't compete against VFX. That is a negative contribution to Forth.

As for Juergen Pintaske, I wrote this thread a few weeks after
you fired him from MPE:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.lang.forth/c0-IVRUqDRY/23v4kQBwCwAJ
Note that the date is 7/4/1019 --- significantly more than the
six months that you describe above.
So, it seems that Juergen Pintaske was not employed by MPE six months ago
when he contacted Tom Hart, but he told Tom Hart that he was still with MPE.
An alternate explanation is that Juergen was employed by MPE six months ago,
and may yet still be employed with MPE, and he does your dirty work for you.
Instead of promoting MPE, he attacks MPE's customers (specifically, Testra).
Either way, you are lying above: "Juergen left MPE about six month ago."

Note that Juergen Pintaske now seems to be claiming that he has a job
at Testra working as a salesman:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/0lwaUpeiW7k

On Sunday, March 15, 2020 at 2:05:03 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> Testra is a great company as far as I know it.
> The only thing I regret is that they did not take the approach VHDL
> in FORTH a few steps further.
> ...
> > You are just a sleazy salesman. You are not my peer. Piss off!
>
> I do my job and you do yours - what is your problem?
> And the people like the work - otherwise they would not pay.
>
> Are you saying that all of the MDs in the world are idiots
> as they employ sales, marketing and PR people?
>
> This would be a bit daring as you have no knowledge in any of these areas.
>
> You cannot understand how companies work it seems.
> There are quite a few companies around that had brilliant ideas -
> but no sales and marketing team to turn it into success.
> The opposite examples are probably Microsoft and iPhone.

Juergen Pintaske says:
> The only thing I regret is that [Testra] did not take the approach VHDL
> in FORTH a few steps further.
How would Juergen Pintaske know that Testra dropped VHDL and swithched
to Verilog except that Stephen Pelc told him?
My read on this is that Stephen Pelc talked to Tom Hart about buying
the Testra processor, but then dropped the discussion when he found out
that Testra had switched from VHDL to Verilog, most likely because
Stephen Pelc only knows VHDL and not Verilog.

I doubt that Stephen Pelc ever had any intention of buying the Testra
processor. More likely is that he wanted to obtain MFX from Testra
because he knew he couldn't write the assembler himself.
His plan, though, was to do a "clean-room implementation" of the Testra
processor in VHDL so he wouldn't have to pay Testra any money.
This may still be his plan. He needs MFX to succeed, and he likely has it.

This is more from that thread:

On Sunday, March 15, 2020 at 7:43:10 AM UTC-7, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> It seems you do not realize what a type of minibrain you are showing here
> - but it fits the results.
>
> Any salesman is better than you trying to sell yourself
> or they would otherwise lose their job;
> you cannot lose your job as you do not have one.
>
> And you can only rather drive an occational tractor or do plumbing -
> - it seems you can do this better than Forth - as nobody wants you
> in Forth work.
>
> So you work in the field you seem to have a skill people pay for
>
> - but no Forth. So what the hell are you doing in CLF?
> ...
> What have you ever contributed to the Forth community
> that other people like, use and can benefit from?
>
> Go back to your plumbing.

I like working as a plumber. It is honorable work. :-)
Realistically, a sleazy salesman such as Juergen Pintaske would never
be able to learn plumbing. The result would be something like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1epni7p2mi0

[Rick C]

On Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 1:18:45 AM UTC-4, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> The result would be something like this:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1epni7p2mi0

That was a good one! I literally laughed out loud at the ending.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging

[Jurgen Pitaske]

Not just messing with Code - now as well with other people's lives it seems

AND HE IS NOT FIGHTING THE PLUMBER STANDARDS.
They probably told him to get lost.
https://www.ciphe.org.uk/consumer/code/

HE IS NOT EVEN A VERIFYABLE MEMBER THERE EITHER
https://www.ciphe.org.uk/consumer/verify-member/verify/

[hughag...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 3:27:51 PM UTC-7, Gerry Jackson wrote:
> On 10/11/2019 22:10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > This is worthwhile thread to read:
> > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/y96tQf_iOSk%5B1-25%5D
> >
> > When I visited Testra, Tom Hart was very mad at me.
> > He said that he had been told (by Juergen Pintaske) that I was
> > "bad-mouthing Testra and telling a lot of lies on comp.lang.forth
> > about Testra." Perhaps Tom Hart read the above mentioned thread
> > and found this quote from me:
> >
> > On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 7:43:42 AM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 2:43:58 AM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
> >>> Is there anyone in the Forth community you admire? So much bile.
> >>
> >> I was impressed by the quality of UR/Forth.
> >> UR/Forth worked okay for writing MFX with only a few flaws,
> >> and I'm not aware of any other Forth that would have been adequate.
> >> So I admire Ray Duncan.
> >>
> >> I was impressed by the MiniForth design.
> >> This was the only Forth processor developed in the 20th century
> >> by anybody other than Charles Moore.
> >> This continues to be the only VLIW Forth processor ever developed.
> >> So I admire John Hart.
> >>
> >> I was impressed by the design of Forth.
> >> So I admire Charles Moore.
> >
> > Perhaps Tom Hart got mad because he assumed that a big President
> > such as himself should get big admiration from a lowly programmer
> > such as myself.
> > Yet I didn't mention him at all! I only mentioned his younger brother!
> >
> > Anyway, here we still are:
>
> Yes unfortunately, boring everybody who reads this crap. What makes you
> think that anybody gives a shit about your relations with Testra.
>
> > On Wednesday, October 30, 2019 at 8:58:24 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Tom Hart can take his patronizing compliment that I did a "good job"
> >> and shove it up his ass. I don't ask Tom Hart to compliment me.
> >> I only ask Tom Hart to stop lying about the HPGL project.
> >> There was no HPGL project! Tom Hart needs to stop lying about this.
> >> That is all that I ask of Tom Hart.
> >> That is all that the world needs from Tom Hart. Nothing else matters.

Well, Gerry Jackson has attacked MFX again:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/lnmTcfFLOg0%5B126-150%5D

On Saturday, March 21, 2020 at 10:59:52 AM UTC-7, Gerry Jackson wrote:
> On 21/03/2020 05:23, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > This whole thread about a "tiny dynamic string thingy"
> > and +STRING and PLACE etc., is kindergarten-level Forth programming.
> > The ANS-Forth cult doesn't have anything comparable to my STRING-STACK.4TH
> > and they aren't even close.
> > I wasn't paying much attention to the thread, as I considered it to be
> > typical comp.lang.forth pseudo-intellectual jibber-jabber.
> >
> > Now I notice that GWJ is taking the opportunity to attack my MFX,
>
> Kindly explain how saying that nobody gives a crap about what happened
> at Testra is an attack on MFX (whatever MFX is). It's pathetic the way
> you keep replying to yourself to keep pumping your shite about you and
> Testra to the top of c.l.f discussions.
>
> > despite the fact that I'm not even in this thread..

ANS-Forth is a cult.
Gerry Jackson is saying that no Forth work is meaningful
unless it has been approved by Elizabeth Rather.
Testra is not a "team player" --- Elizabeth Rather didn't give them
permission to be Forth developers --- so, nobody gives a crap about them.

Actually, not very many people do care about Testra and their VLIW processor.
The only company that I know of that is using VLIW is Lockheed-Martin
(at least, they were in the late 1990s). I interviewed for a job there.
They had a VLIW processor that had a very large instruction word
(IIRC, it was 128-bit). They used this for processing data from radar.
The military used this for obtaining images of the ground that was
detailed enough to show individual soldiers and vehicles.
They were hand-assembling the code using a spreadsheet. The columns
represented the fields in the opcodes, and the rows represented the opcodes.
I told the interviewer that hand-assembly like this was not necessary.
My MFX assembler could take source-code that was written as if it would
be assembled sequentially and rearrange the instructions to pack them into
the opcodes so that multiple instructions could execute concurrently
in a single opcode (single clock cycle) and the result was guaranteed to be
the same as if the instructions had been assembled sequentially one per opcode

in the same order that they appeared in the source-code.

The interviewer seemed to have no idea what I was talking about.
He seemed impressed by how smart the assembly-language programmers had to be
to manually assemble code for a VLIW processor, and he was not aware that
the assembler could do this automatically. He did seem interested in hiring me.
He arranged a second informal meeting over lunch where I would meet the team.
Nothing technical was discussed at the lunch.
Then, suddenly, I was disqualified. I didn't know why.
At that time, I was still assuming that Testra was giving me a recommendation.
Most likely what happened is that they called Testra and got Tom Hart,
and Tom Hart told them that I was a stupid little trainee who got fired
because I couldn't take direction and was not a team player.
Also, they may have asked Tom Hart to tell them about the assembler.
Tom Hart's answer would have undoubtedly have been a jumble of hand-waving
nonsense because he didn't know how the assembler worked and he had never
used the assembler for writing code so he wasn't familiar with what it did.

Anyway, Lockheed-Martin is the only company I know that used a VLIW processor.
I have never met anybody else.
I sometimes hear people claiming (on opencores.org) that their processor
is VLIW, but upon examination I find that it is not VLIW and the person
doesn't know what VLIW is --- the person is just using the term "VLIW"
as a synonym for "super-duper" --- really knows nothing about the subject.

[Rick C]

On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 10:38:26 PM UTC-4, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Anyway, Lockheed-Martin is the only company I know that used a VLIW processor.
> I have never met anybody else.
> I sometimes hear people claiming (on opencores.org) that their processor
> is VLIW, but upon examination I find that it is not VLIW and the person
> doesn't know what VLIW is --- the person is just using the term "VLIW"
> as a synonym for "super-duper" --- really knows nothing about the subject.

I thought I had mentioned before that I've programmed a VLIW processor. It was an array processor which is equivalent to a floating point chip in two rack cabinets attached to a mainframe computer. It actually contained two different processors, the SMP (Storage Move Processor) and the ACP (Arithmetic Control Processor). The ACP had a 120+ bit instruction word controlling two pipelined adders, two pipelined multipliers, a square root unit, a register bank, a barrel shifter, cache memory and the interface to the SMP. The SMP moved data between the cache and main memory which kept up with the fast clock of the SMP and ACP by being 8 way interleaved. The SMP had a smaller instruction word, but I don't recall how many bits.

Both processors fit any definition of VLIW. This was about 1987.

--

Rick C.

--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[hughag...@gmail.com]

There is a tendency for people who have no talent or brains
to get into a herd and declare themselves to part of the majority,
and even to be leaders. Here we have Juergen Pintaske saying that
only this CIPHE organization can grant me status as a plumber.
Similarly, he believes that only Forth-200x can grant me status
as a Forth programmer.

I have said this before:

On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 7:38:26 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, November 10, 2019 at 3:27:51 PM UTC-7, Gerry Jackson wrote:
> > On 10/11/2019 22:10, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Now I notice that GWJ is taking the opportunity to attack my MFX,
> >
> > Kindly explain how saying that nobody gives a crap about what happened
> > at Testra is an attack on MFX (whatever MFX is). It's pathetic the way
> > you keep replying to yourself to keep pumping your shite about you and
> > Testra to the top of c.l.f discussions.
> >
> > > despite the fact that I'm not even in this thread..
>
> ANS-Forth is a cult.
> Gerry Jackson is saying that no Forth work is meaningful
> unless it has been approved by Elizabeth Rather.
> Testra is not a "team player" --- Elizabeth Rather didn't give them
> permission to be Forth developers --- so, nobody gives a crap about them.

Here is a thread about the COVID-19 virus, a subject that none of
the comp.lang.forth experts-on-everything have any knowledge of:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.forth/di3HI9NrZQw%5B101-125%5D

On Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 9:55:52 PM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 12:49:24 AM UTC-4, Robert L. wrote:
> > If you think that leaving your house is dangerous,
> > don't leave your house.
> >
> > If you think that riding motorcycle is too dangerous,
> > don't ride a motorcycle, but don't despotically prevent
> > others from riding motorcycles.
> >
> > "Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God."
> >
> > "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a
> > little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
>
> Those quotes don't apply to a situation where the liberty is given up
> temporarily. We have never had complete liberty and never will.
> Everything is a balance. In this case the majority impose our will
> upon the small, ridiculous minority for the benefit of all.
>
> I don't know where you live, but right now if you want to leave your home
> without it being an important purpose you risk being arrested
> and placed where you have much less chance of dodging this disease.

Rick Collins is declaring himself to be part of the majority, and
saying that anybody who disagrees with him is a "small ridiculous minority"
that is subject to being arrested and imprisoned without benefit of a trial.
He doesn't actually know anything about micro-biology, and he doesn't care.
He cares about taking people's liberty away from them, whatever the excuse.

Realistically, people never give up their liberty "temporarily."
That's like giving up your cojones temporarily, expecting them back later.
Similarly, anybody who gets on his knees for the Forth-200x committee
will never be a Forth programmer again --- you are going to become
a customer of MPE with no purpose in life except to send Stephen Pelc money.

Tom Hart says:
"Sounds like the Forth community has some problems with non team players."

Tom Hart, the expert on how to be a team player, never wrote a single line
of MFX assembly-language code during the development of MFX.
When I wrote MFX, I was really a team of one. Other than Steve Brault
writing the code for + that was beyond me, I got no help at all
(I could have likely figured out how addition works if I had taken more time).
Now Tom Hart wants 100% of the credit for writing MFX. Go team!