I'm Australian and I use Forth
Peter Jakacki
Posts: 10,193
I was having a laugh at the last thread about programming languages and countries including my own, but for the life of me I can't understand the moderation out of left field that was applied. Of course it's not our forum, we just do all the talking, but considering the light hearted nature of the thread in question I find it incredible that anybody could ever be insulted. In fact it is fairly typical of an Aussie to poke fun and stir-up a mate only to get some back in return, that's to be expected, give and take, in a friendly way, never malicious. If we go and sulk and carry on like a baby who needs a nanny to protect them then it's time we grew up. I just wish the world would grow up.
Comments
You Aussies are very fun-loving have a great thing going down under, other than making margaritas with an egg. In a nice Sydney bar, Rocks area, October 1985, a bartender made me a yellow margarita. The only drink I have ever sent back. Fortunately he was a very friendly fellow and I got him sorted out with my favorite recipe. 1/8 lime juice, 1/8 triple sec, 1/4 tequila and 1/2 sweet & sour mix. Zero eggs.
Uh-oh. Alcohol talk. I may have just crossed the line...
As Eric brought up alcohol... you know why they call that beer XXXX? Because they can't spell SH*T! An Aussie friend told me that, and I have no idea what that beer tastes like.
This thread reminds me that I need to try and bring up FIG FORTH on my retro computer.
I was in DFW during Desert Storm and drank all the buds that weren't being drunk by you guys
btw, we wouldn't kick his poor donkey, we are a bit more vulgar when we say it properly as @Rse
Also, the only way to straighten you out with Forth is to assimilate you and make you a part of the Forth collective. Just like each Prop cog is like a Borg, working together in a collective. Resistance is futile.
Geez, thanks. What did I miss that brought this on?
You know - they are strong enough to handle anything. They wouldn't mind in general.
Enjoy!
Mike
Nothing wrong with Aussies or Forth. But both are often misunderstood. If the USA hadn't had a Revolutionary War, they would all be living in the U.S.A. today. Forth may not be the best language for all and everything, but it is empowering and educational. Those that skip it seem to just want to ignore the low level details and processor architecture (unless they are Assembler purist). The world is full of computer language snobs that only prefer the language that they are presently compulsively obsessing about.
As this is a forum frequented by children, the mods try to keep everything positive.
The thread was funny(or at least I thought so), but it wasn't exactly PC (Parallax Compliant)...
Offence was not my intention. As the late great Kenny Everett used to say, "It's all done in the best possible taste".
I'm with Peter that forum moderation can seem over motherly sometimes and political correctness can be really annoying (not pointing at this forum in particular)
But I do realize that in text, over the net, without the face to face context of meat space, what is intended as humour can easily be received badly.
Here in NZ we end the joke with "because they can't spell beer". Of course NZ beers are superior to Aussie beers ;-)
No flames please, I'm an Ocker, too.
Hey David,
you know LISP.
And FORTH (maybe especially TACHYON) gives you lot's of the features from LISP you rarely find.
LISP is prefix - not the usual infix.
So FORTH is just the other way round.
It really took me a while to get used to it.
You know PASM - then it's fun to read the TACHYON source code
(that's how I learnt PASM ;-) )
Don't give up too soon.
If you need a little support - the TACHYON forum is there.
Is Parallax targeting a mythical child genus out there? Neither Bill Gates nor Steve Jobs really did very much in their childhood. Bill did figure out Basic, but his mom got him the Microsoft deal and he delivered an OS that he couldn't write himself (possibly with a load from Dad). Steve Jobs had the Woz doing all the initial heavy thinking and mostly just demanded others to do everything his way.
Admittely, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, and others weren't much better. But none of them depended on a website to fulfull their success story. It seems to all be a futuristic mythology.
BTW, it seems nobody took the bait with my suggestion of a 'Wall of Shame'. I am sure Parallax wouldn't do such a thing.
But trying to actuall start a language war? Is that a worthy contribution to the community?
LISP? Why would anyone ever name an artifical intelligence language after a speech impediment?
Beer? Lisp? OMG, these are four letter words..... lock the thread.
because lists are the basic data structure.
Even a program is just a list.
- but you might know this :-)
Programmers are bit twisted. We have Yak and Bison, Python, Lisp, Forth, and much more.
And don't forget Bash, and the wacky world of Unix utilities.
If Forth is so much like Lisp, how can I do the following? :-)
(mapcar (lambda (x) (+ x 2)) '(1 2 3 4 5))
\ Swaps the values at two different cell addresses : cell_swap ( addr1 addr2 -- ) 2dup \ duplicate both addresses L@ \ load from addr2 (addr2 consumed) >r \ push value onto return stack L@ \ load from addr1 (addr1 consumed) swap L! \ put data under addr2 and store (addr2 consumed) r> \ load addr2's origina value from return stack swap L! ; \ save to addr1 \ Compares values at two different cell addresses and puts flag on stack : cell_greater? ( addr1 addr2 -- flag ) L@ \ load from addr2 (addr2 consumed) swap L@ \ load from addr1 (addr1 consumed) swap > ; \ correct order of values and compare. \ Applies the execution token n1 times to arguments further \ down the stack which are used by the token function. \ token - execution token of comparison function \ n1 - the number of times to apply the function. : apply \ ( token n1 -- ) >r \ copy n1 to return stack begin \ preserving a copy of the token, but execute it also. >r r@ execute r> \ move n1 to data stack, decrement, preserve and test. r> 1- dup >r 0= until r> drop drop ; \ Applies the execution token n1 times to arguments further \ down the stack which are used by the token function. Loops \ if the execution function returned true and the count is \ not zero. \ token - execution token of comparison function \ n1 - the number of times to apply the function. : apply? \ ( token n1 -- ) >r \ copy n1 to return stack begin \ preserving a copy of the token, but execute it also. >r r@ execute \ Test the return function's flag if \ move token back r> \ decrement and test the count, but preserve it. r> 1- dup >r 0= else \ move token back and push exit flag r> true then until r> drop drop ; \ Used to allocate an array of cells of the desired size passed on stack : array ( n -- addr ) create cells \ converts count into size in bytes here over erase \ clear the buffer and allot \ allocate space Does> swap cells + ; \ run time gives address of cell at index 10 array foo \ load an array named foo with values for test. : foo_init 4 0 foo L! 3 1 foo L! 9 2 foo L! 7 3 foo L! 14 4 foo L! 0 5 foo L! 13 6 foo L! 27 7 foo L! 101 8 foo L! 1 9 foo L! ; : foo_dump 0 foo ? 1 foo ? 2 foo ? 3 foo ? 4 foo ? 5 foo ? 6 foo ? 7 foo ? 8 foo ? 9 foo ? ; foo_init \ Used to set up loop limits from current addresses on \ the stack. \ addr1 - the stop address of the cells to sort \ addr2 - the start address of the cells to sort \ token - execution token of comparison function : selection_push_limits ( addr1 addr2 token --- addr1 addr2 token limit start ) >r \ save the comparison function over cell + \ set up loop limits over r> \ get the token -rot ; \ push it under loop limits \ Variation on the classic selection sort, always o(n^2), \ but it is simple and generic because it uses an execution \ token to compare cells. \ \ addr1 - the stop address of the cells to sort \ addr2 - the start address of the cells to sort \ token - execution token of comparison function : selection_sort ( addr1 addr2 token --- ) selection_push_limits do \ from addr1 to addr2 step cell selection_push_limits drop i cell + ?do \ from i+1 to addr2 step cell dup j i rot \ compare j and its adjacent cell execute if j i cell_swap then cell +loop cell +loop drop drop drop ; foo_dump 9 foo 0 foo ' cell_greater? selection_sort foo_dump \ inner loop of bubble sort, worst case is o(n^2), it performs \ a single bubble up oeration. \ addr - the starting address of the cells to sort \ count - the number of cells to sort \ token - execution token of comparison function \ returns \ swapped - flag to indicate if a swap was performed. : bubble_up_loop? ( addr count token -- addr count token swapped ) \ compute do loop limits >r over over cell * + >r over r> swap r> -rot \ push the flag under the loop limits false -rot \ from addr1 to addr2-cell step cell do \ stack contains addr count token swapped swap \ bring the comparison function to tos dup i i cell + rot \ compare i and its adjacent cell execute if i i cell + cell_swap swap \ bring swapped to tos and or with true -1 or else swap \ bring swapped to tos only then cell +loop ; \ Classic bubble sort, worst case is o(n^2), but often \ better for nearly sorted data. Also generic because \ it uses an execution token to compare cells. \ \ addr - the starting address of the cells to sort \ count - the number of cells to sort \ token - execution token of comparison function : bubble_sort ( addr1 addr2 token --- ) over ['] bubble_up_loop? swap \ stack has addr, count, and token for apply? apply? \ pop off the preserved arguments. drop drop drop ; foo_init foo_dump 0 foo 10 ' cell_greater? bubble_sort foo_dumpIt might not be the best FORTH either. I wrote it as a learning exercise before I had the FORTH chops to write something more complicated.
To paraphrase Oscar Wild.
Martin, that line noise you posted in code block above is why most sane humans stay away from Forth.
Only joking guys, honest, ouch stop beating on me....
Ummm... Thanks! Unfortunately, that looks like an example of the kind of Forth I'm not smart enough to read. However, this does something interesting enough that I may try to overcome that! :-)
I like the joke that Java's main contribution to programming was popularizing lambda expressions, because it didn't have them until the most recent version.
and Which invokes the execution token on the top of the stack. Is that correct? Does Tachyon have these constructs?