Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!willett!ForthNet From: ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Experimental Ideas Message-ID: <1402.UUL1.3#5129@willett.UUCP> Date: 28 Jul 90 01:38:59 GMT Organization: String, Scotch tape, and Paperclips. (in Pgh, PA) Lines: 61 Category 3, Topic 5 Message 34 Thu Jul 26, 1990 F.SERGEANT [Frank] at 22:39 CDT Dennis, thanks for the pF info. I'd like to hear even more about it from any polyFORTH enthusiasts. Indirect threading: well, gee, I've hardly thought about it in some time, having become convinced that direct threading is best way to implement Forth on the 8088. But, maybe speed isn't everything; I'll keep it in mind. Block files: I'm pretty well in sync with you here. Line editor: Here's where I have my most doubts and questions. You really think a line editor can be efficient and pleasant? If I'm ever in Manhattan Beach I'd love to have you show me. What I'm comparing it to is my memory of the line editor in L&P's F83. However, I do have some pleasant memories of line editors: SPF on IBM mainframes and the editor on big UNIVACs. These were surprising useful. Since the editor is a major contact point between a person and the Forth, I've been of the opinion that it colors one's view of other factors. For example, some people may hate BLOCKs because of a lousy editor, but blame BLOCKs rather than properly blaming the editor. Threaded vocabularies: If I understand, the search order is determined by what the vocabularies are named - for example, they might be searched in alphabetical order, but that you don't "dynamically" change the search order. I'm happy with this idea. I've been living with (more or less) no vocabularies and it hasn't bothered me (twitch, twitch). With my control key type screen editor I don't have the problem of editor words conflicting with Forth words. Appending commas to assembler words distinguishes them from similar Forth words. I've failed to see much attraction to the idea of having hundreds (or even tens) of vocabularies. Search time? Nah - I'm using a fully hashed search. Multi-tasker: Yeah, I like that idea too. "It's so simple it has to work" as Rob Chapman might say. You can use it instead of interrupts, in many cases. It's on my list of things to add sometime. 3 Character Names: I noticed this wasn't on your list. Is it that pF is now using 31 or that you are so used to it you don't even notice it any more or ...? Now that the whole world (even cmFORTH) has gone to 31 char names, I'm still considering trying out the 3 char names one of these days. As an aside (as if all this weren't an aside!), I saw a demonstration of an Allen Test Products big thing-a-ma-jig. Maybe that was the type of thing you programmed. It was impressive. I think the price I heard was $28,000. (I think I'll build one.) It seemed to be a big tool box with florescent lighting, a light pen activated monitor, an oscilloscope type monitor, an exhaust pipe probe, manifold vacuum connection, #1 spark-plug pickup, clamp over a battery cable (ammeter I suppose), connection to the car's on-board computer, and remote thumb switch to say "continue." -- And a lot of info inside it about various car models and their specs and troubleshooting - that might be the hardest part to build! Anymore ideas on why pF is best or on what makes the perfect Forth? This is more a FORML inquiry rather than a STANDARD inquiry. -- Frank ----- 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