rfl@oddjob.UChicago.EDU (Bob Loewenstein) (03/09/88)
The implementation of Neon on the Mac is a very nice object
oriented implementation of forth. The company gives out the
high level code{ which is loaded onto a near fig kernel. The
major difference in the kernel is the addition of a third
stack (great with 68000 machines) for object and method use
as well as named input parameters and local variables inside of
forth words.wmb@SUN.COM (Mitch Bradley) (04/15/89)
There are lots of object oriented packages for Forth. Dick Pointain wrote a book about object oriented Forth extensions. Forthtalk is an object-oriented extension package for MacForth. There is a language called NEON which is an object-oriented Forth for the Mac. Dr. Steven Lewis wrote an enhanced version called Boron, which runs on my Forthmacs Forth implementation for Atari ST, Mac, and Suns. It has been described in several journals, most recently in the 1989 Rochester Forth Conference proceedings. Mitch
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (01/21/90)
Date: 01-19-90 (08:19) Number: 2799 To: GENE LEFAVE Refer#: 2793 From: RAY DUNCAN Read: NO Subj: POLYFORTH OBJECTS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE For users of LMI's UR/FORTH systems, a version of Dick Pountain's object word set has been available on the LMI Forth Board for some months. It can be downloaded from the file URPOUN.ARC in conference 4 on the LMI Forth Board. NET/Mail : LMI Forth Board, Los Angeles, CA (213) 306-3530 ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (01/21/90)
Category 3, Topic 41 Message 12 Sat Jan 20, 1990 D.RUFFER [Dennis] at 22:02 EST Gene, I've been doing a little bit of playing with you POLYOBJ file. It has a couple of problems with working on 8086 PolyForth. I've tried to make the changes, but now the system isn't working anymore. It might be easier if you make a few changes and re-post it, since you know what makes it tick and how to check it. I'm just getting to lost in it to trust my changes anymore. First, it is not recommended to change the function of existing words. You change to the nucleus is ok, but I would call it another name instead of using an existing name. I changed your definition of -FIND to -FINDS and left the original -FIND alone. Next, in quite a few places, you used 4 or 4+ where you should have used 1 CELL and CELL+. I made the changes, but I'm not sure I hit them all. Most of your stuff was ok, but blocks 1 and 2 were the worst cases. It is particulary difficult to know what to do with user variables, but the best bet is to use 1 CELLS instead of a literal number. On the user variables, a relatively standard way to start them off is with the following statement: STATE STATUS - CELL+ ( last user offset from block 198) Then, at the end of the block you can use the following to let you know how many have been used: CR .( Last USER =) . You appear to have added the definition CELLS+ that is not standard. I've just returned that to CELLS + as it should have been. The definition L@ uses a thing called -LINKS to remove some of the bits of the link field. That is only needed on the 386 version. I believe that L@ can be defined as AKA @ L@ for the 8086. The definition SEAL is just too large and I get an "out of range" error on the /LOOP. I tried to refactor it, but I think that is where I messed up. Try your hand at seeing if you can keep the DO and the /LOOP a little closer together. I think I can see what you are doing there, but you can do a better job a factoring it than I can and you know how to test it. That's as far as I got, but now the dictionary links are messed up after I load block 7. I believe the END> is the one that is doing it, which uses my butchered SEAL, but finding the problem is more than I want to deal with right now. Thanks. DaR ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (02/03/90)
Date: 02-02-90 (02:23) Number: 2842 (Echo) To: DENNIS RUFFER Refer#: 2804 From: GENE LEFAVE Read: NO Subj: OBJECT ORIENTED FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE Sorry Dennis, I didn't realize just how incompatible with 8086 pF it was. I just got back from vacation so give me a few days to look it over. . Just for starters the 17 CELLS used through out is wrong. This should be CURRENT CONTEXT - assuming that context preceeds the threads and current follows. The 17 is from 16 threads plus CONTEXT . What I think would be a better solution is a whole new version of -FIND that takes an address of a single dictionary thread and searches fig style. This would save a lot of trouble. . The problem with SEAL is probably related to the 17 CELLS. I don't off hand recall what is after CURRENT but I'm sure setting it to 0 will cause a lot a problems. SEAL scans down all the threads and creates a little mini dictionary for the object. . I'll try to post a new version shortly. . Gene --- ~ EZ-Reader 1.13 ~ ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (03/17/90)
Date: 03-13-90 (16:23) Number: 134 (Echo)
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: IAN GREEN Read: (N/A)
Subj: OOPS AND FRAMEWORK III Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Anybody ever try using FW to do object oriented programming? After
all FW itself is an object oriented system in itself.
A little while ago I found an archive called HELPMAN that contained
some old but interesting material describing some Knowledge Oriented
Programming Systems and a few sample FW files. After converting the old
FW2 stuff to FW3 (easy) I decided to try it out. Has anybody else ever
tried this stuff out?
Ian Green
NET/Mail : British Columbia Forth Board - Burnaby BC - (604)434-5886
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process.
Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (07/02/90)
Category 3, Topic 41
Message 16 Sun Jul 01, 1990
GARY-S at 06:44 EDT
PORTED FROM Wetware =>
-------
--------------------
Item 13 by Luther Huffman (luther), on Sat, Jun 16, 1990 (08:49)
Object-Oriented Forth?
I've read about Dick Pountain's "Object-Oriented Forth" book.I was wondering
if anybody has actually included his features into their compilers/inter-
preters? Do you think they might be useful features or take away from the
use of Forth as a quick tool akin to a super assembler.
My thoughts on this is that OO would be useful, at least as an option.
After all, object-oriented techniques are useful even in assembly
programming.
I've also always been reminded by Forth of Lisp and OO libraries are "hot"
right now in Lisp (CLOS and the like).
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process.
Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or willett!dwp@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.eduForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (07/03/90)
Category 3, Topic 41
Message 17 Mon Jul 02, 1990
GARY-S at 06:46 EDT
PORTED FROM Wetware =>
-------
--------------------
Item 13 by Luther Huffman (luther), on Sat, Jun 16, 1990 (08:49)
Object-Oriented Forth?
1 new of 2 responses total.
#13.2 (2) by Luther Huffman (luther), on Sat Jun 30 07:15:43 1990:
Is Weinstein's OOF based on Pountain's ideas? Do you know whether an OOF
has been ever implemented as a compiler or are they all implemented as
interpreters?
Response by Gary Smith:
To my best knowledge (often suspect) there are no compiler implementations
>of OOF.
>Dave's OOF is more akin to SmallTalk than to Ada. He has full object and
>message support, inheritance... etc. The revised version is not out, but
>I believe it will be quite impressive. Those who read 'THe Computer Journal'
>have been able to follow Dave's plans in print, in his Forth column. TCJ
>is probably the last true grass roots Computer Magazine around since the
>death of 'MicroCornucopia' last year.
> gars
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process.
Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or willett!dwp@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.edudwp@willett.UUCP (Doug Philips) (07/03/90)
> Response by Gary Smith: > To my best knowledge (often suspect) there are no compiler implementations > >of OOF. > >Dave's OOF is more akin to SmallTalk than to Ada. He has full object and > >message support, inheritance... etc. The revised version is not out, but > >I believe it will be quite impressive. Those who read 'THe Computer Journal' > >have been able to follow Dave's plans in print, in his Forth column. TCJ > >is probably the last true grass roots Computer Magazine around since the > >death of 'MicroCornucopia' last year. > > gars First, MicroCornucopia didn't die last year. It did a couple of months ago. But, would someone please post or email to me the address / phone number for 'The Computer Journal'? Do they have Forth columns very frequently? I still scan Computer Language hoping to find something there upon occasion. BTW: I thought that the last two issues of FD were particularly juicy. Thanks to the editors/publishers, and esp. to the writers! -Doug --- Preferred: willett!dwp@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.edu OR ...!sei!willett!dwp Daily: ...!{uunet,nfsun}!willett!dwp [in a pinch: dwp@vega.fac.cs.cmu.edu]
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (07/05/90)
Date: 07-02-90 (08:39) Number: 3448 (Echo) To: GARY SMITH Refer#: 3437 From: JACK WOEHR Read: NO Subj: OBJECT ORIENTED FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE > > PORTED FROM Wetware => > ------- > -------------------- > Item 13 by Luther Huffman (luther), on Sat, Jun 16, 1990 (08:49) > > I've read about Dick Pountain's "Object-Oriented Forth" book.I was won > if anybody has actually included his features into their compilers/int > preters? Do you think they might be useful features or take away from > use of Forth as a quick tool akin to a super assembler. > JForth on the Amiga features ODE, the Object Development Environment, a great Object Oriented loadable option. See my file JAXBOXES.whatever-compression floating around better ForthNet BBSes everywhere. =jax= NET/Mail : RCFB Golden, CO (303) 278-0364 VESTA & Denver FIG for Forth! ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or willett!dwp@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.edu
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (07/11/90)
Date: 07-06-90 (18:29) Number: 3467 (Echo) To: GARY SMITH Refer#: 3437 From: GENE LEFAVE Read: NO Subj: OBJECT ORIENTED FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE GS> I've read about Dick Pountain's "Object-Oriented Forth" book.I was wondering GS> if anybody has actually included his features into their compilers/inter- GS> * Origin: GEnie and the Forth Interest Group I've implemented most of Pountains words in 32 bit polyFORTH. I haven't had a chance to give them a good workout yet. I'm using them to implement a database program. It's very conveniant not to have to remember what the data type is for every field in the database. Also, in my case, I can now completely hide the access method for data fields that are reached via links and/or computations. I'm working on some screen stuff now to hide the display and input functions. --- ~ EZ-Reader 1.13 ~ ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or willett!dwp@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.edu
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (07/11/90)
Category 3, Topic 41
Message 20 Sat Jul 07, 1990
GARY-S at 07:58 EDT
To: GENE LEFAVE
Subj: OBJECT ORIENTED FORTH
In a message from ECFB Gene Lefave writes:
>I've implemented most of Pountains words in 32 bit polyFORTH. I haven't
>had a chance to give them a good workout yet. I'm using them to implement
>a database program.
I hope you'll share the code with all of us in the near future, Gene. A
database sounds like an excellent oof application.
Gary
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process.
Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or willett!dwp@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.eduForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (07/11/90)
Category 3, Topic 41
Message 21 Sun Jul 08, 1990
D.RUFFER [Dennis] at 01:41 EDT
Gary, Gene has given us his code. In fact, we have quite a few object
oriented extensions to Forth in the libraries. Here is a list of some of
them:
[If anyone wants these items, drop me a message at one of the
addresses at the end of this message. I cannot process any requests
which do not include the two-line description of the files you want.
The files will be mailed to UUENCODED. --dwp]
No. File Name Type Address YYMMDD Bytes Accesses Lib
1977 POLYOBJ.ZIP X J.SHIFRIN 900120 6300 19 5
KEEP Desc: polyFORTH objects - Obj Oriented
1895 OO4TH21.ARC X OLORIN 891118 15120 53 5
KEEP Desc: Version 2.1: Complete OOPS for Forth
1879 OOFORTH.ARC X OLORIN 891102 15120 39 5
KEEP Desc: Object Oriented Forth Extension(PD)
1630 INTR_OOP.ARC X B Newburger 890318 10080 23 3
KEEP Desc: Introduction to Object-Oriented Prog
1497 OOPS.ARC X ECFB 890131 7560 47 5
KEEP Desc: OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAMMING SYSTEM
1473 LOCALOBJ.ARC X R Bicknell 890121 6300 22 5
KEEP Desc: Locals and Objects for Atari ST
1256 UR-POUN.ARC X J.NELSON5 880923 20160 7 5
KEEP Desc: Pountain Types in UR/FORTH: JGN
1255 UR-OBJS1.ARC X J.NELSON5 880923 12600 4 5
KEEP Desc: UR/FORTH object descriptions: JGN
1254 JGN-EG1.ARC X J.NELSON5 880923 39060 18 5
KEEP Desc: Objects in Real Time Control: JGN
1152 BINDING.ARC X DHWEINSTEIN 880821 3780 6 5
KEEP Desc: Changes Forth to a late binding lang
1150 EDO.ARC X G HAWKINS 880821 15120 10 5
KEEP Desc: EXTENDED DATA OBJECTS IN FORTH
1127 OBJECTS.TXT X R HOSELTON 880808 31500 22 5
KEEP Desc: OBJECT PROGRAMMING SUPPORT TOOLS
1124 OBJECTS.ARC X R HOSELTON 880807 6300 30 5
KEEP Desc: OBJECT PROGRAMMING SUPPORT TOOLS
1016 DIMARRAYS8.ARC X JAX 880420 2520 14 6
KEEP Desc: N-dimensional self-indexing objects
1015 NU-DIMARRAYF83 X JAX 880417 2520 21 6
KEEP Desc: N-dimensional self-indexing objects
1014 NU-DIMARRAYJ4T X JAX 880417 2520 12 6
KEEP Desc: N-dimensional self-indexing objects
1011 DIMARRAYALL.AR X JAX 880416 2520 7 6
KEEP Desc: Combined file DIMARRAY + DIMLIMS
DaR
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process.
Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or willett!dwp@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.eduForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (07/16/90)
Date: 07-14-90 (03:40) Number: 3501 (Echo) To: GARY SMITH Refer#: 3469 From: GENE LEFAVE Read: NO Subj: OBJECT ORIENTED FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE To: Gary Smith c/o Genie GS> I hope you'll share the code with all of us in the near future, Gene. A GS> database sounds like an excellent oof application. Much of the internals have more than a passing resemblence to Forth Inc's DataBase facility. I'm not sure what they would think about posting it. Also, providing docs for their words would be a big undertaking. A working 32 bit version of Pountain's wordset is on ECFB. There's a couple of spots where I didn't use the new CELL words correctly for 16 bit Forth. I was planning on posting it one of these days real soon now. You must have the book to even think about understanding the code. In addition the code is set up for multiuser polyFORTH, which means lots of fiddling with dictionary threads. Gene --- ~ EZ-Reader 1.13 ~ ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or willett!dwp@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.edu
dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips) (05/29/91)
In article <1991May28.203116.23910@ecst.csuchico.edu>, fish@ecst.csuchico.edu (Kevin Haddock) writes: > Now how this relates to FORTH coding conventions and readability. First > thing I have against FORTH syntax and all the OOPS I have run across > is they all have the syntax BACKWARDS! The VERB COMES FIRST!!!! I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that having the verb come first is backwards (SmallTalk has the object first) or that having the object come first is backwards and the verb *should* be first? > The biggest problem I see with FORTH is that you have to make up > so many names and concatenate all kinds of wierd 'jerry rigged' syntax > around them to convey what they are. Either that or you have > to resort to long-hyphenated-names and the vertical code that > goes along with it. I have been working on a parser that I believe > corrects that problem. It works something like this: The verb is > an object who's behavior when parsed/interpreted is to put it's > selector object (the token that represents the message) on the stack. > Whenever a noun is interpreted it's behavior is to send itself to > the verb object on top of the stack (or does the second send itself to the > first, I can't remember; it's been awhile since I played with this). > At the end of the processing of a method the remaining objects on > the stack are sent to each other until just 'inert' objects remain > as results. Those 'inert' objects are basically those that have had > all their argument needs satisfied. I very much dislike active message names. They are too clumsy to pass around as parameters. Same goes for active object names (you have to name every object or special case arrays and records/structures and...) > With this type of parser/interpreter and an object oriented system, > a FOOL could be very readable because you would re-use lots of little > verbs, create a few short sweet nouns, and the source code would not > look like some kind of reverse-polish-greek-form-of-hyphenated-pig-latin! I don't think you've made the case for having to have long hyphenated names. And reverse polish is the nature of Forth. > Another quick note: In a true object oriented system the objects are > created unbound and float on the stack until they are either no longer > needed (90% of the cases) or are bound to a name. I haven't seen > too many FORTH OOP's that do this (but then again I haven't seen too > many FORTH OOPS!). The question is really one of what OOP oughta look like in Forth. OOP requires knowing the types of things. Forth is traditionally untyped. OOP usually requires automatic memory management. Forth is traditionally very flexible in letting you roll your own memory management. Therefore adding OOP to Forth is _not_ just adding a few new defining words (object, class, message, whatever), but requires an integrated effort to achieve a typed _and_ memory managed system onto which an OOP can be added. That is, if you want to go the whole nine yards and have a full blown OOP Forth. (IMNSHO). -Doug --- Preferred: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us Ok: {pitt,sei,uunet}!willett!dwp