GEnie@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (12/19/89)
Date: 12-17-89 (20:46) Number: 2674 (Echo) To: W.BADEN1 [WIL] Refer#: NONE From: SYSOP (ECFB/SHIFRIN) Read: NO W[>(The following communication was given to me, and I am passing it on. W[>The author wishes to remain anonymous.) ... W[>Byte Magazine's special Forth issue was in 1981. That's a long time W[>ago. Computing has gone far since then. W[>Forth hasn't. I don't normally respond to anonymous misinformation, but given Wil's imprimatur, I guess it should be treated as a originating from someone with a modicum of good sense. The first question to be raised is "compared to what?" C, Pascal, Fortran, COBOL? I'm not sure how much one could consider any of these as advancing. C and Pascal have gone through periods of greater or lesser popularity; Forth hasn't. Is that the criterion? If not, then what? ANSI standards? Hardware implementations? OO extensions? Extensive library additions? Books? What does our unnamed correspondent feel is inadequate or missing? --- * QDeLuxe 1.10 #214s ------------ ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated program. Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (01/05/90)
Date: 12-28-89 (19:19) Number: 1549 (Echo) To: GARY-S Refer#: 1546 From: SYSOP (ECFB/SHIFRIN) Read: NO Subj: FORTH IN THE MARKETPLACE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE > Forth didn't catch on for one simple reason... it's whole design is based > on the assumption of rigidly limited memory. We're not in that world any > more, except for us embedded control weenies. Just in case we actually have a two way link-up here, I should mention that I have a work application in LMI's PC/Forth+ which now takes about 350k (mostly code, not just buffers). It's about 25-30,000 lines of code. Needless to say, Forth's compactness was not the main reason for its selection (productivity was!). --- * QDeLuxe 1.10 #214s ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated program. Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'
ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (07/28/90)
Date: 07-25-90 (08:44) Number: 3568 (Echo) To: W.BADEN1 [WIL] Refer#: 3558 From: JACK WOEHR Read: NO Subj: PROPER DOMAIN OF FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE > >I'd like to see others' ideas of what the proper domain of Forth is. I >especially eager to hear from John Wavrik. Proper domain(s) of Forth? 1) EMBEDDED CONTROL! 2) Standalone operating system for any type of computer, as long as the selected kernel provides for: a) premptive as well as round-robin mtasking b) launching "foreign language" apps. =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) (07/29/90)
Date: 07-27-90 (03:40) Number: 3572 (Echo) To: W.BADEN1 [WIL] Refer#: 3558 From: GENE LEFAVE Read: NO Subj: PUZZLES AND PROBLEMS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE WW>Every language has areas of application in which it is superior, even WW>Basic, Cobol, and Ada. I'm trying to discover just what is Forth's WW>domain of I can't resist getting into this discussion, so here goes. I find FORTH to be excellent in small companies or departments where pro- grams are developed by a couple of programmers or software engineers on tight schedules. Granted, it's not that great for algebraic stuff, but that is such a small percentage of anything I've done it's irrelavant. The program where I needed to do an FFT was just 3 blocks out of 200 or so. FORTH allows blocks of code to be easily reused. It allows an easy division of labor. I've found that it is fairly easy to read given shadow blocks. We brought in a summer student. After two weeks he was working on device drivers and terminal emulators. He had worked with FORTH on an old S-100 sytem before, and had no problem learning polyFORTH and brought up an 8 channel intelligent communications board driver. I've had clients bring in consultants who were able to work with our program after a couple of days, and produce custom reports for them. FORTH is excellent in applications that requires an interpretter. In my application that does page composition I use essentially three nested interpretters. The outer one gets data, a second one interprets the page formats, and the final one interprets embedded typesetting commands and puts the letters on the page. FORTH, once extended with about 200 block buffers, makes a good database language. Since data resides in the block buffers and isn't being shuffled around all the time, my response time is generally an order of magnitude better then database languages on similar equipment. FORTH allows the fact that one is working with addresses to be easily hidden. So most of our work is actually done directly in the block buffers rather then in record buffers. The block interface to data files has proven extremely reliable, especially under DOS. This is because we allocate blocks in batches of 100K at a time, then close and reopen the file, forcing DOS to update it's directory. Therfore, very little changing to the FAT table. No changes to FAT means fewer DOS problems. Our product is very much like a 4GL. Blocks are loaded that provide high level descriptions of reports. These descriptions then control the loading of the words needed to actually generate the report. Finally, we can add a custom layer, which redefines our standard words for unigue require- ments. We can out bid any of our competitors that use standard database products when custom changes are required, because all we do is modify the "custom" blocks for that customer. No time consuming compiles, and NO changes to the standard "core" of the application. We don't have to build in "hooks" and predict in advance what will need to be customized. I find that the block interface to DOS makes polyFORTH especially good at handling file conversions. Open up a file of blocks. Read it with a special interpretter, ie DBASE, WORD, etc. Spit stuff out to DOS. I've spent nearly $1000.00 on data conversion programs, I've found its always faster using FORTH. In general, I've found FORTH is appropriate for any dedicated application. That is, those applications that are running 99% of the time. It's fast, it allows you to bid minimum equipment, (at maximum profit), and it lets you quickly add the custom stuff with a minimum of fuss. And the fact that you can call in on a modem, and interactively, in real time, work out a problem is icing on the cake. I just hope my competitors don't find out. --- ~ 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) (07/29/90)
Date: 07-26-90 (20:18) Number: 3573 (Echo) To: JACK WOEHR Refer#: 3568 From: PAUL PRICE Read: NO Subj: PROPER DOMAIN OF FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE to continue 3. Bringing up NEW hardware..... Paul Price 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@hobbes.cert.sei.cmu.edu
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (08/10/90)
Date: 08-06-90 (03:26) Number: 3618 (Echo)
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: CHRIS WATERS Read: (N/A)
Subj: PUZZLES AND PROBLEMS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Gene Lefave writes:
GL: I find FORTH to be excellent in small companies or departments whe
: programs are developed by a couple of programmers or software engi
: on tight schedules. Granted, it's not that great for algebraic s
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
It would probably be good for larger projects if appropriate
tools were developed - code libraries, VCS, and the like. I've
managed teams of Forth programmers before, and have always felt
the lack of good management tools. This is one of my most serious
objections to the block-oriented file access. A Forth that used
standard OS stream files could probably use existing project
management tools, and would be fully suitable for projects of any
size - or at least as suitable as a language like C.
I agree that Forth is weak on algebraic expression, but, as
Gene mentioned, this is not usually a major part of any given
software package. I certainly feel that the limitations of the
RPN are greatly overemphasized by newcomers to Forth. Most of the
Algol-derived languages, like Modula and C, use a semi-random
mixture of infix and PREFIX notation (for function calls). At
least Forth is consistent! <grin>
But I would be really interested to hear of people's
experiences with teams of Forth programmers. What kinds of
problems arose, how did you cope with them, etc. I would
especially be interested to hear of any project management tools
people have developed in or for Forth programming. Tell us of
your experiences. If we can't learn from your successes, maybe we
can learn from your failures!
Chris
-> MegaMail v2.00 #609:~ Jerry is God (Rice, Garcia, or Lewis?)
PCRelay:SNAKEPIT -> #150 MetroLink (tm) International Network
4.10 Snake Pit*408-287-2353*San Jose, CA*HST/v32
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process.
Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or dwp@willett.pgh.pa.uswmb@MITCH.ENG.SUN.COM (08/10/90)
> It would probably be good for larger projects if appropriate > tools were developed - code libraries, VCS, and the like. > ... > A Forth that used standard OS stream files could probably use > existing project management tools, and would be fully suitable > for projects of any size > ... > But I would be really interested to hear of people's > experiences with teams of Forth programmers. At Sun, we use the normal Unix software management methodologies, primarily based on SCCS (Source Code Control System). It works pretty well. Every now and then I wish for something better, but by and large it gets the job done. We have about 6 Forth programmers working on the same software base, and we have fairly strict revision control (which is absolutely necessary, since we support several different computers, at different firmware revision levels, and a lot of money is riding on the outcome). We try to do software management things in pretty much the same way that the Unix people do it, for 2 reasons: 1) By and large, they know what they are doing, and have developed a strategy which, although a little cumbersome for individualistic Forth cowboys, does indeed work. My butt has been saved several times by SCCS. 2) Using the same methodologies means that we can use the same release engineering team to help us do external source code releases and archiving. We use text files for everything, so all the normal Unix text processing tools work for Forth. We also use tag files to allow easy navigation of the code; you just put the editor cursor on a word and you can zap right to the definition of that word (this works in both vi and EMACS). There is a lot to be said for being compatible with the rest of the world. > I would especially be interested to hear of any project management > tools people have developed in or for Forth programming. Peter James is a Forth programmer who specializes in databases. He sells (for big bucks; he has to pay the rent) a software project management system that is written in Forth and uses a lot of relational database concepts. It looks pretty neat, although I haven't actually used it. It is not specific to Forth-based projects; it works for Pascal or C or presumably most anything. I don't remember the name of his company. Mitch
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (08/15/90)
Date: 08-12-90 (17:08) Number: 3639 To: JACK WOEHR Refer#: 3568 From: HANS PIERROT Read: NO Subj: PROPER DOMAIN OF FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE > 2) Standalone operating system for any type of computer, as > long as the selected kernel provides for: > a) premptive as well as round-robin mtasking Jack I am surprised at your comment. After reading your article on Multitasking in a recent copy of Embedded Systems Progrogramming I thought that you were of the opinion that pre-emptive multitasking was not realy neccessary and that round robin would meet most if not all requirements. Maybe I misunderstood the intent of your article. Regards Hans. --- * Via ProDoor 3.0 NET/Mail : Australian Connection Forth Board (Melbourne) 61 3 8091787 ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (08/16/90)
Date: 08-14-90 (08:47) Number: 3648 (Echo) To: HANS PIERROT Refer#: 3639 From: JACK WOEHR Read: NO Subj: PROPER DOMAIN OF FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE >> 2) Standalone operating system for any type of computer, as >> long as the selected kernel provides for: >> a) premptive as well as round-robin mtasking > >Jack I am surprised at your comment. After reading your article on >Multitasking in a recent copy of Embedded Systems Progrogramming I >thought that you were of the opinion that pre-emptive multitasking was >not realy neccessary and that round robin would meet most if not all >requirements. Maybe I misunderstood the intent of your article. Oh, I'm all for the roundrobin in control projects ... I can see where a pure roundrobin would cause problems on a multiuser system like a VAX 11/180 though. Recently I designed (but did not build) a multiuser controller with a combination of round-robin and pre-emptive multitasking. =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 dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (09/09/90)
Date: 09-05-90 (02:45) Number: 3724 (Echo) To: ALL Refer#: NONE From: DEAN MARTINDALE Read: (N/A) Subj: THE FORTH PC Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE Is anyone anywhere contemplating the possibility of a Forth PC? You know, a PC based on the Harris Forth chip or something likethat? I can already hear the objections: time, money, economic realities, etc. But a dream has to start somewhere, no matter howunfeasible it appears at first. Is anyone else out there dreaming like me? --- * MjrUTI : # 510/2.0 PCRelay:FORTHNET -> 4.10a14 4th Net Data Channels (801) 943-8837 SLC UT NET/Mail : DC Information Exchange, MetroLink Int'l Hub. (202)433-6639 ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (09/09/90)
Category 2, Topic 11 Message 72 Sat Sep 08, 1990 GARY-S at 08:08 EDT To: DEAN MARTINDALE Subj: THE FORTH PC Dean Martindale in a PCRElay FORTHNET message writes: > Is anyone anywhere contemplating the possibility of a Forth PC? You should _really_ consider participating in Jef Raskin's upcoming GEnie guest conference (Wednesday, October 17). Jef is credited with originating both the Apple Mac and the Canon Cat (a Forth pc). He will be discussing 'What happened to the Cat ?'. Gary ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us
rajuk@umree.isc.umr.edu (Raju Khubchandani) (09/10/90)
In article <1694.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us> ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) writes: > From: DEAN MARTINDALE Read: (N/A) > Subj: THE FORTH PC Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE > > Is anyone anywhere contemplating the possibility of a Forth PC? You > know, a PC based on the Harris Forth chip or something likethat? I can ( deleted at places ) Real Time Devices,Inc. in PA must by now, be out with an IBM PC plug-in card based on the Harris Forth chip. This is/was supposed to be for data acquisition and control applications. BTW, their present line of plug-in cards is programmable in Forth. I would like to know if anybody on the net have used them and your opinions compared to other data acquisition and control plug-in cards or systems. Raju
rvn@forth.mlb.semi.harris.com (Rick VanNorman) (09/10/90)
In <1694.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>, Dean Martindale writes: > Is anyone anywhere contemplating the possibility of a Forth PC? You > know, a PC based on the Harris Forth chip or something likethat? I can > already hear the objections: time, money, economic realities, etc. But a > dream has to start somewhere, no matter howunfeasible it appears at > first. Is anyone else out there dreaming like me? YES! I would love to see a pocket computer, such as the Poquet (VHS tape size, with chicklet keyboard, 25x80 lcd display, 2 AA size batteries), with an RTX inside it. I don't think I can convince Harris to officially support such a project unless someone is going to seriously sink some cash into it, but I can provide as much support as my wife will let me 8^). Let's create some interest, folks! Rick VanNorman Staff Engineer, Software Development RTX Marketing Harris Semiconductor Melbourne, Florida, USA All opinions expressed by me, real or otherwise, are my own.
dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips) (09/12/90)
In <1990Sep10.141815.21317@mlb.semi.harris.com>, rvn@forth.mlb.semi.harris.com (Rick VanNorman) writes: > In <1694.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>, Dean Martindale writes: > > > Is anyone anywhere contemplating the possibility of a Forth PC? You > > YES! I would love to see a pocket computer, such as the Poquet (VHS tape > size, with chicklet keyboard, 25x80 lcd display, 2 AA size batteries), > with an RTX inside it. > > I don't think I can convince Harris to officially support such a project > unless someone is going to seriously sink some cash into it, but I can > provide as much support as my wife will let me 8^). > > Let's create some interest, folks! You have my vote, so long as it is reasonably affordable. I don't suppose you'd want to go to a three key keyboard (CM style) and cut costs even more? :-) -Doug --- Preferred: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us Daily: {uunet,nfsun}!willett!dwp
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (09/12/90)
Date: 09-09-90 (01:12) Number: 3736 (Echo)
To: DEAN MARTINDALE Refer#: 3724
From: JACK WOEHR Read: NO
Subj: THE FORTH PC Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Dean ...
There have been stabs at this in the past.
I have always thought that a Forth PC would be neat. My
latest attempt to sell such a project focused on the Philips/Signetics
68070, an M68010-clone with MMU on board for multi-user protected
memory standalone Forth operating system ... :-)
=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 dwp@willett.pgh.pa.usForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (09/18/90)
Date: 09-13-90 (15:52) Number: 3785 (Echo) To: JACK WOEHR Refer#: 3736 From: DEAN MARTINDALE Read: NO Subj: THE FORTH PC Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE To really get a Forth PC off the ground would require a well-established backer, if nothing else for the prestige. I think the days of Apple Computers built in a garage being successful are over. Either that or someone with a big dream and a lot of patiece. I'd even consider doing it except I don't have the technical expertise to design such a thing. What do you think? Anybody want to approach IBM about the idea? --- * MjrUTI : # 510/2.0 PCRelay:FORTHNET -> RelayNet (tm) 4.10a14 4th Net Data Channels (801) 943-8837 SLC UT NET/Mail : DC Information Exchange, MetroLink Int'l Hub. (202)433-6639 ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: uunet!willett!dwp or dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us
cwpjr@cbnewse.att.com (clyde.w.jr.phillips) (09/21/90)
In article <1756.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>, ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) writes: > > To really get a Forth PC off the ground would require a well-established > backer, if nothing else for the prestige. I think the days of Apple > Computers built in a garage being successful are over. > > Either that or someone with a big dream and a lot of patiece. I'd even > consider doing it except I don't have the technical expertise to design > such a thing. > > What do you think? Anybody want to approach IBM about the idea? WHat about SUN? They have FORTH in rom on their mother boards I beleive, And I know they use it for bring-up testing, S_BUS autoconfig and in Other areas. Clyde
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (10/16/90)
Date: 10-05-90 (10:23) Number: 3958 (Echo) To: JACK WOEHR Refer#: NONE From: MICHAEL HAM Read: NO Subj: MANAGING FORTH PROJECTS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE I noted that you were to give a presentation at the Embedded Systems Conference on managing Forth projects. I didn't hear the presentation, but I very much hope that the content will appear as an article in Embedded Systems Programming. The topic has been of interest to me, and I would be delighted to read of your experience and the lessons you have gleaned from it. 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: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us or uunet!willett!dwp
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (12/19/90)
Date: 12-15-90 (07:55) Number: 557 of 573 To: THOMAS MCWILLIAMS Refer#: 502 From: STEVE PALINCSAR Read: NO Subj: SMALL FORTH Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE Conf: FORTH (58) Read Type: GENERAL (+) You can use both HS/Forth and LMI's forths for producing turnkey EXE programs. I know only hearsay about LMI's products, but have been using HS/Forth for several years now. Everything I do with it gets TURNKEYed and distributed as an EXE file that, when running, is an application like any other application, regardless of the language used for production. I find that the minimum size of an EXE file produced is about 24K, ranging up to a maximum (assuming you do not have large amounts of buffer space saved within the dictionary, etc.) of 35-40K for a complex program. An extremely complex application of mine, with many saved screens, internal data files, etc., is 71K. The process of producing a turnkey application is quite simple. After having written the program, with a top level word like DO_IT that does the entire thing, from start-up to BYE, load the SEAL utility, rearrange system segments for compaction if you wish to (rearranging the segments so that headers and any user-defined data buffers in segments will be discarded rather than saved as part of the on-disk image results in huge savings) enter the following: TURNKEY [turnkeyword] [filename.exe]. TURNKEYed applications may be distributed freely without any royalties, licensing fees, etc. PCRelay:VIRGIN -> #448 RelayNet (tm) 4.10 The Virginia Connection (CASA) 703-648-1841 <<<>>> ----- This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process. Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us or uunet!willett!dwp
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (01/08/91)
Date: 01-04-91 (19:11) Number: 772 of 783 To: MITCH BRADLEY Refer#: NONE From: IAN WATTERS Read: NO Subj: FORTH IN THE MARKETPLACE Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE Conf: FORTH (58) Read Type: GENERAL (+) GS] ^ This "embedded system" is not small in the traditional sense, in that ] ^ the code runs on a 28 MIPS processor and occupies about 128K of ROM Cough! Gasp! Wasn't it C. Moore who said if it couldn't be done in 16K it wasn't worth doing? ] ^ but it is very constrained; we have had to use numerous shrinking ] ^ techniques to make the needed functions fit in the available space. Apart from using colon defintions :-) any examples? //\/\/ --- ~ SLMR 1.05 #109 ~ It's noisy next door. A Dr Herbert West lives there... PCRelay:OLEF -> #181 RelayNet (tm) 4.10a15 The Node is OLEF, HUB is HUBOLEF1 in the UK <<<>>> ----- This message came from GEnie via willett. You cannot Reply to the author using email. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, whatever). Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us or uunet!willett!dwp
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (01/12/91)
Category 2, Topic 11 Message 94 Thu Jan 10, 1991 B.RODRIGUEZ2 [Brad] at 07:32 EST Slightly off topic... > [from Mitch Bradley] ...the source control tools (we use SCCS) have > been invaluable. I've never used SCCS, but its advocates sound like Forth programmers in their enthusiasm for it, so maybe I'm missing out on something. Has anyone attempted to develop something like SCCS for the (non- Unix) Forth domain? - Brad ----- This message came from GEnie via willett. You cannot Reply to the author using email. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, whatever). Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us or uunet!willett!dwp
wmb@mitch.Eng.Sun.COM (Mitch Bradley) (01/14/91)
> Has anyone attempted > to develop something like SCCS for the (non- Unix) Forth domain? 1) One of my clients uses a data base system (maybe DBase, but I'm not sure) to maintain the Forth source files for their rather-large application. They have a Novell network of PC's that they use for editing, etc. The application delivery platform is a 680x0-based VME system that is gatewayed to the Novell network. 2) Peter James has a company, the name of which eludes me right now, that sells a source-code-management/software project support database system written in Forth. I think it supports several software development environments, including Macintosh PWB. I doubt that it is cheap; he's trying to make a living selling it. Peter has been doing database systems implemented in Forth for several years. 3) I think that the Valdocs people developed some sort of screen-based project management tools. I vaguely remember that there was some talk of commercializing it. Somebody may have the rights to it. Ron Braithwaite might know. Conceptually, it shouldn't be too difficult to cobble-together something like SCCS. The hardest component would be a good "minimum set of differences" finder. On the other hand, I would be hard-pressed to justify the effort of writing it, compared to buying an off-the-shelf database system or porting RCS (RCS is a source management system, roughly equivalent to SCCS in scope, that is, or at least used to be, available in C source form). Mitch
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (02/27/91)
Date: 02-24-91 (13:03) Number: 1302 of 1313 (Echo)
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: JERRY SHIFRIN Read: (N/A)
Subj: HARRIS NEWS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
Conf: FORTH (58) Read Type: GENERAL (+)
According to the 2/11/91 issue of EE Times, under the heading:
Harris shuffles IC sector
ASIC division axed, 500 face layoffs in reorganization
"Harris will continue to invest in its Intel 80286 and
Motorola 6805 lines of CMOS microprocessors, but it will not
make new investments in its proprietary RTX family of
real-time controllers. "The base technology [for the RTX] is
still excellent, but we didn't anticipate the amount of
software and support tools that we had to develop for the
processors," [Semiconductor chief Jon] Cornell said. He
added that the RTX is "still alive" but would not elaborate.
I think this amplifies what I've said previously about one of
Forth's problems being the lack of common tools. Every Forth
programmer does not need his/her own unique library of routines
for strings, arrays, math, graphics, and so on. I think it's a
damn shame that Martin Tracy's efforts in this area (the FIG
Model Library) went so totally unacknowledged and unrewarded!
<<<>>>
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett. You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwpkoopman@a.gp.cs.cmu.edu (Philip Koopman) (02/28/91)
In article <2418.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>, ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) writes: > According to the 2/11/91 issue of EE Times, ... > still excellent, but we didn't anticipate the amount of > software and support tools that we had to develop for the > processors," [Semiconductor chief Jon] Cornell said. He > added that the RTX is "still alive" but would not elaborate. The tools Cornell was talking about were the C compiler and other conventional language support stuff (as well as ICE and hardware support items). Forth was a done deal and already mostly paid for (a PD Forth by Rick VanNorman, and a commercial Forth from Steve Pelc). These were probably 10% of the total software tools cost. "Still alive" means if you want rad-hard parts, there is still active development work (these parts are *very* expensive!). If you want commercial parts, they have some still on the shelves. > I think this amplifies what I've said previously about one of > Forth's problems being the lack of common tools. Every Forth > programmer does not need his/her own unique library of routines > for strings, arrays, math, graphics, and so on. The Harris Forth customers rolled their own just like other Forthers. Strings, arrays, graphics, etc. were completely useless to most commercial RTX system-builders -- they were into little tiny embedded controller boards. The only real call for support was for a Floating Point package, which I provided from my MVP Forth floating point book (and which was to be augmented with a commercial DSP library for the 2010). Phil Koopman koopman@greyhound.ece.cmu.edu Internet 2525A Wexford Run Rd. (412) 935-6697 Wexford, PA 15090 *** this space for rent ***
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (03/04/91)
Category 2, Topic 11 Message 100 Sat Mar 02, 1991 GARY-S at 06:15 EST I had an interesting walk through a land called nostalgia. I came across an old pile of "Dr. Dobb's Journals". A language called Forth was quite the vogue then. The September 1982 issue was still published by People's Computer Company, but that's a story unto itself. The editor was a fellow named Marlin Ouverson. Some of the products advertised included Armadillo Forth for the Radio Shack Color Computer (Frank Sergeant, know anything about them ?), Lifboat Associates was marketing Mitch Timin's Forth for CP/M (whatever became of Mitch ?) and a couple of 'wanna be' Forth Vendors named Miller Microcomputer Services and Laboratory Microsystems, Inc. By September 1983, Marlin was gone and Reynold Wiggins was the editor. It was still published by People's Computer but the end of their reign was near. By the following September the banner would read M & T Publishing. In that same interim the magazine would no longer profess to be 'For Users of Small Computer Systems' and would proudly announce it was the source of 'Software Tools for Advanced Programmers'. Advertisers in 1983 included HAWG WILD Software selling to the Sinclair market (Timex would soon end my misguided plans <grin>), the appearance of Randy Dumse's New Micros, Inc and the R65F11, and a couple of 'wanna be' Forth vendors, Laboratory Microsystems, Inc. and Miller Microcomputer Services. Vesta was making the scenne in 1985. Also a couple of 'wanna be' vendors called Laboratory Microsystems, Inc. and Miller Microcomputer Services. Besides Vesta Technologies there were a couple of other ROM'd Forths. They apparently were foolish enough to believe there would be a future in embedded systems. By 1986 M & T Publishing had decided the magazine was 'For The Professional Programmer' and the sixth annual Special Forth Issue had a nice article on Binary Trees in 'C'. Some 'wanna be' company called Laboratory Microsystems, Inc. was announcing a couple of Forth products. Vesta Technologies was still trying to push ROM'd Forth. Some people never learn. The pile of old 'Dr. Dobbs Journals' burned rather nicely. ----- This message came from GEnie via willett. You *cannot* reply to the author using e-mail. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.). Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (03/04/91)
Category 2, Topic 11 Message 101 Sat Mar 02, 1991 F.SERGEANT [Frank] at 17:14 CST GS> Some of the products advertised included Armadillo Forth for the GS> Radio Shack Color Computer (Frank Sergeant, know anything about GS> them ?) . Yes, I do! I wrote that Forth for the 6809 RS Color Computer that Armadillo was selling. I've learned a lot since then. One of these days I'll put Pygmy on the Color Computer. I still run Color Forth as I have my EPROM programmer plugged into a CoCo. I load a tiny boot loader from a cassette recorder into the CoCo and then download the Color Forth image into the CoCo from the PC (that way I don't have to fool with CoCo disks drives, which never were worth a damn, in my opinion, besides which, the EPROM programmer is plugged into the cartridge connector that the disk controller would want to use). Then I use the PC as a terminal and disk server to talk to the CoCo, download the EPROM image, etc. The CoCo is a lousy system to get for your main, full-featured, word-processing, massive memory & disk computer system. This is because by the time you add a disk, memory, decent terminal, etc you'll have more invested than if you got a PC clone. BUT, for a dedicated computer, where you use your existing PC as terminal & disk server, it is not a bad deal. I think you can often find the CoCo III available discount mail-order for around $100. It comes with 128K RAM (upgradable to 512K), serial port, cassette interface, color graphics (to a TV or a color monitor), A to D, D to A, etc. And, it uses a great microprocessor (the Motorola 6809). Ah fond (and otherwise) memories ... . Thanks for your DDJ review, I enjoyed it. . -- Frank ----- This message came from GEnie via willett. You *cannot* reply to the author using e-mail. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.). Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp
ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (03/30/91)
Category 2, Topic 11
Message 103 Sun Mar 24, 1991
D.RUFFER [Dennis] at 19:17 EST
I don't think there would be any problem in making copies of the order form
Elliott. However, it is usually updated every issue, so it goes out of date
very quickly. I'd think a few hundred would last a little while, thus you'd
be ending up giving out obsolete information.
It's a thought though. {B-{)> DaR
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett. You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwpForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (05/22/91)
Category 2, Topic 11 Message 107 Mon May 20, 1991 R.CAVANAUGH [BobC] at 21:32 MDT Please forward to M. Bradley: The point I was trying to make, and may have obscured due to fat- fingering, it that I _definitely_ consider Turbo C Professional package to be a fully functional system for developing code on the IBM PC et. al. type of machines. Given that this piece of software is a complete development tool, its cost is roughly 10% that of some of the other packages (DaR: pF, etc)that were discussed. Without any thought of taking bread from anybody's mouth, it seems to me that Forth, Inc, LMI, and the other development houses could offer a less expensive though polished alternative to their main packages. This would hopefully have the effect of getting more people interested in looking at forth, without the risk of a significant investment to start out. I am using F-PC for a project at work because (while I purchased all the manuals from Offette)I could afford to buy it myself, whereas it would have _never_ been approved for capital purchase. Since I have introduced it into my engineering group, I have succeeded in interesting some of my collegues into looking at forth, and the end result may be that our house could become a customer of a full-up system. I learned "C" on a development package that cost less than $100.00, which at that time (1985) was the only one another engineer could convince the boss to spring for, as assembly was the primarily language used. We now have Turbo C++, Datalight, and a multi-kilobuck 68000 cross development system, because "C" has been proven in several of our products. I would like to see Forth follow that same path. -- BobC. ----- This message came from GEnie via willett. You *cannot* reply to the author using e-mail. Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.). Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp