Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Programming > Forth > Re: part 21 ass...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 40 of 54 Topic 3806 of 4285
Post > Topic >>

Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp

by Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mar 11, 2008 at 05:14 PM

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, Jonah Thomas wrote:

>
>
> Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > Andrew Haley wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> > >
> > > Forth has greater advantages when it's not tied to a lumbering beast
> > > of an operating system.  This is when Forth really sings.  Also,
> > > Forth's *margin of advantage* in embedded control projects is
> > > greater than when it's just another language running a desktop
> > > program on a general-purpose computer.
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > > Andrew.
> >
> > If Forth had succeeded instead of MSDOS/Windows and maybe even Unices,
> > what would the personal computer environment look like today? Do you
> > think that Forth could have brought us to what we enjoy and take for
> > granted today? Maybe it just the nature of the beast - allowing it to
> > excel in small, finite projects? Maybe there are just too many Forths
> > - each one capable of doing an excellent job in Forth's niche, however
> > incompatible with each other?
> >
> > Regardless, I'd sure like to see a stand-alone Forth system is all its
> > glory -- so that I could compare it to my OSX and Ubuntu boxes.
>
> Here's one;
>
> http://www.forthos.org/
> This is like eforth, loaded with GRUB. All in assembler, no C. No
> applications beyond an assembler and editor.

I just DLed the compressed CD image. I've got several 350Mhz Pentium IIs
kicking around. I'm going to give it a shot.

>
> Another:
>
> http://www.colorforth.com/
> This is like nothing else. The version at this site appears to be an old
> one, you might want to do a search for an updated system.
>
> And there are others. It's a big deal that most of the applications
> you're used to won't be on a Forth OS until somebody writes them in
> Forth or assembler or a combination. And if you write them in Forth or
> assembler or a combination for one ForthOS they won't run on any other
> ForthOS without a lot of modification.

Yep! That sucks! Would be hard to make a living writing office
productivity software for the Forth community unless you knew every bloody
Forth dialect that exists. Maybe folks clued in to that 20-25 years ago,
and said adios - I'm off to see the wizard, the wonderful wizard of ???
-- 
Duke Normandin
dukeofperl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
 




 54 Posts in Topic:
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
m-coughlin <m-coughlin  2008-03-07 10:38:11 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Elizabeth D Rather <er  2008-03-07 08:06:59 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Richard Owlett <rowlet  2008-03-07 12:50:19 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-07 12:14:26 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-08 01:30:31 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-07 18:53:16 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-08 02:41:56 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-08 16:03:35 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-09 16:12:17 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-09 10:51:39 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Elizabeth D Rather <er  2008-03-09 08:33:40 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-09 13:37:07 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-10 15:43:19 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-10 10:10:29 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Bernd Paysan <bernd.pa  2008-03-10 17:50:30 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Elizabeth D Rather <er  2008-03-10 08:13:12 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-10 13:04:55 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-10 20:24:04 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-10 14:36:11 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-10 20:52:30 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-10 15:06:33 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-10 22:25:21 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-10 16:56:41 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
"Stan Katz" <  2008-03-12 18:00:10 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-12 16:13:31 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Marc Olschok <nobody@[  2008-03-11 19:21:16 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Aleksej Saushev <asau@  2008-03-11 23:05:58 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-11 22:42:04 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-10 20:19:34 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-10 19:52:18 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-10 14:11:26 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Aleksej Saushev <asau@  2008-03-10 23:21:00 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Andrew Haley <andrew29  2008-03-10 21:24:12 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-10 16:02:05 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Andrew Haley <andrew29  2008-03-11 10:34:01 
A Brief Look at History (Re: part 21 asserts forth best for smal
m-coughlin <m-coughlin  2008-03-11 22:09:03 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Duke Normandin <dukeof  2008-03-11 15:04:25 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Bernd Paysan <bernd.pa  2008-03-11 16:40:14 
Writing Many New Versions of Forth (was Re: part 21 . . . )
m-coughlin <m-coughlin  2008-03-14 17:08:11 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Duke Normandin <dukeof  2008-03-11 17:14:42 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Elizabeth D Rather <er  2008-03-11 21:59:19 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Aleksej Saushev <asau@  2008-03-13 00:43:39 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Bernd Paysan <bernd.pa  2008-03-13 16:12:17 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Aleksej Saushev <asau@  2008-03-15 00:00:58 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Marc Olschok <nobody@[  2008-03-14 21:32:04 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Duke Normandin <dukeof  2008-03-11 20:44:40 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Elizabeth D Rather <er  2008-03-11 21:46:47 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Duke Normandin <dukeof  2008-03-10 05:19:15 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-07 11:56:33 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-08 00:16:03 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
John Doty <jpd@[EMAIL   2008-03-07 17:34:02 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Albert van der Horst <  2008-03-08 10:58:33 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
Guy Macon <http://www.  2008-03-08 17:11:27 
Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would l
kenney@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-03-08 04:20:28 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Sun Oct 12 13:25:33 CDT 2008.