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 41 of 54 Topic 3806 of 4284
Post > Topic >>

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

by Elizabeth D Rather <erather@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mar 11, 2008 at 09:59 PM

Duke Normandin wrote:
....
> 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 ???

Although there are a number of interesting Forth variants represented on 
c.l.f, the fact is that all the Forths in very widespread use 
(Win32Forth, gForth, SwiftForth, VFX, iForth, etc.) are all Forth94 
compliant, so you could get pretty far with that if you wanted to.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310-491-3356
5155 W. Rosecrans Ave. #1018  Fax: +1 310-978-9454
Hawthorne, CA 90250
http://www.forth.com

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




 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 Sat Oct 11 18:39:02 CDT 2008.