ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) (06/14/90)
Date: 06-11-90 (13:21) Number: 641 (Echo) To: ALL Refer#: NONE From: KEITH MUND Read: (N/A) Subj: WINDOWS Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE What tools are available for using FORTH and Windows? . Any good debuggers for FORTH available? . Keith Mund ----- 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) (06/16/90)
Category 3, Topic 2 Message 35 Wed Jun 13, 1990 R.BERKEY [Robert] at 20:28 PDT To: Keith Mund Re: Msg of 900611 Subj: Debugging and windows KM> What tools are available for using FORTH and Windows? KM> Any good debuggers for FORTH available? What do you have in mind as regards debuggers? 1) Single stepping Forth colon definitions, including DOES> 2) Decompilation 3) Single stepping assembly 4) Disassembly 5) with source names 6) Debugging a metacompiled object to bring it up 7) Debugging a target/cross-compiled object F-PC 3.5 has a fair debugger for 1 and 2. MPE, in England, has some sophisticated debuggers. Is there something specific about debugging and Windows? ----- 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) (02/27/91)
Category 3, Topic 2 Message 38 Sun Feb 24, 1991 D.RUFFER [Dennis] at 22:26 EST Re: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips) > My question is why are there so few PD/Shareware C systems (semi- > rhetorical question) and why has the Forth PD/Shareware market > had such a great eclipsing influence over the "professional > product" market? One answer Doug is that Chuck and FORTH, Inc. "allowed" FIG to put most of what Forth is into the public domain. This same thing has not happened in the C marketplace. AT&T and other big companies maintained very strict control over C, but Forth had no such "benifactor" to "protect" it. One can only muse as to what the Forth industry would be like had the roles been reversed. 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!dwp
cwpjr@cbnewse.att.com (clyde.w.jr.phillips) (02/27/91)
> > > My question is why are there so few PD/Shareware C systems (semi- > > rhetorical question) and why has the Forth PD/Shareware market > > had such a great eclipsing influence over the "professional > > product" market? > > One answer Doug is that Chuck and FORTH, Inc. "allowed" FIG to put most of > what Forth is into the public domain. This same thing has not happened in the > C marketplace. AT&T and other big companies maintained very strict control > over C, but Forth had no such "benifactor" to "protect" it. One can only muse > as to what the Forth industry would be like had the roles been reversed. > The C equivalent of PD FORTH is small C. I wish someone with more precise knowledge would write a book detailing the "cousins" nature of FORTH & C. By this I mean they are from the same era of software technology, influenced by the same acedemic principles/strivings and essentially share some of the same philosophy, ie small kernal, softawre tools, etc. They differ primarily ( in the beginning ) by being the product of one vs two brains ( I favor the single-minded approach vs committee! ) rich vs poor "parents", interactive incremental compiler vs batch compiler, etc. FORTH would have made AT&T funix a winner long before AT&T unix ever could. (can you say user friendly systems interface?) However the "cousins" grew apart more due to application target needs more than anything else. Yet FORTH seems to have encapsulated more of "computer science" than C to the degree that C seems to have just recently addressed some of the things we have grown accustomed to, namely OOP, rapid prototyping, better factoring, etc. And they continue to lead aech other astray...(C interpreters/Browser FORTHS) This is far from a complete and accurate picture but it is something. I will try to write this up barring no better effort but I really don't feel I have precise enough knowledge to do a good job yet. ( SEE LIFE WITH UNIX for some of my source ) But I think this is valuable historical analysis and needs to be done to allow for more cooperation in the future between competing elements in the computer sciences. This sorta thing may also help get FORTH into CS cources! Clyde