peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (01/19/90)
First of all, a side comment. Would someone at SCFVM.bitnet or jade.berkeley.edu change the FIGI-L mailing list gateway so that it leaves the Reply-to: field set to the original poster, instead of bouncing replies back into the mailing list? Secondly, the meat. I'm a little confused by the following comment: > The advantage that Forth has over other languages is that if you are not > worried about portability, YOU DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE STANDARD. However, > every system developed must provide at least the standard. You see, I can't think of a single language for which this statement is not true. OOo. No flames, and this is not a pipe either: ---U -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>. / \ \_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'
sabbagh@acf5.NYU.EDU (sabbagh) (01/19/90)
In article <5:51PE3ggpc2@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >Secondly, the meat. I'm a little confused by the following comment: > >> The advantage that Forth has over other languages is that if you are not >> worried about portability, YOU DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE STANDARD. However, >> every system developed must provide at least the standard. > >You see, I can't think of a single language for which this statement is not >true. Your point is well-taken. I meant that Forth is _much_ more malleable a language than any other, except Lisp and its derivatives. I was trying to get at the idea that you could even provide PORTABLE NON-STANDARD EXTENSIONS with Forth, if the initial standard was comprehensive enough (i.e., gives standards for manipulating vocabularies, param fields, code fields, name fields, etc.). > OOoo >No flames, and this is not a pipe either: ---U I suggest you take in a museum with post-Impressionist or modern art :-). Hadil G. Sabbagh E-mail: sabbagh@csd27.nyu.edu Voice: (212) 998-3125 Snail: Courant Institute of Math. Sci. 251 Mercer St. New York,NY 10012 +===============================+ | | | ________ _______ | | \ | / ______ | | \ | / / | | \ L____/ / | | \__________/ | | | | | | Ceci n'est pas une pipe | | | +===============================+
ZMLEB@SCFVM.BITNET (Lee Brotzman) (01/20/90)
>First of all, a side comment. > > Would someone at SCFVM.bitnet or jade.berkeley.edu change the > FIGI-L mailing list gateway so that it leaves the Reply-to: field > set to the original poster, instead of bouncing replies back into > the mailing list? > FIGI-L Moderator speaking here... Yes, I could do this, but I hesitate to do so unless I get more than one request. I have about 80 subscribers on BITNET (God only knows how many readers on Usenet) and exactly one request to change the 'Reply-to:' field. Unless I hear a public outcry against the default for replies being sent to the list, I won't change. So, readers of FIGI-L (Usenet, etc.), if there is a problem with having your replies go to the list, please tell me. SEND E-MAIL TO ME, DON'T USE REPLY!!! :-) Personally, I prefer replying to the list and when I really want to send private mail, I still have that option. Others may feel differently, and are welcome to mail me directly. -- Lee Brotzman (FIGI-L Moderator) -- BITNET: ZMLEB@SCFVM Internet: zmleb@scfvm.gsfc.nasa.gov -- I'm only a contractor, don't blame me for the tax rates and don't blame -- the government for my statements.
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (01/21/90)
Is this guy's name really nil? ------->------>------>------>------>------>------v In article <1034@acf5.NYU.EDU> sabbagh@acf5.UUCP () writes: > > OOoo > >No flames, and this is not a pipe either: ---U > I suggest you take in a museum with post-Impressionist or > modern art :-). Dada'll make Magritte my teeth and go, I guess. -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>. / \ \_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (01/21/90)
In article <9001200036.AA03287@jade.berkeley.edu> ZMLEB@SCFVM.BITNET (Lee Brotzman) writes: > Personally, I prefer replying to the list and when I really want to > send private mail, I still have that option. Others may feel differently, > and are welcome to mail me directly. The problem is that if we out here in usenet land want to send mail to the list we hit 'f', for followup. If we want to send mail to the poster, we hit 'r'. It's an automatic reaction. The way you have things set up, both sets of replies go to the same place! And one is a %-sign horror that tries to go to /dev/null unless I'm very careful. -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>. / \ \_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'