I was reading the Starting Forth web page and noticed that it refers a
lot to single and double integers being 32 and 64 bits rather than 1 and
2 cells. I checked the ANSI spec and it clearly says a cell size is
implementation defined and not a fixed value (but a minimum of 16 bits).
Wasn't the web version of Starting Forth going to be updated for the
current ANSI spec? Or is that something that was just going to be
applied to the examples and not the whole document? Or has it just not
been done yet?

If nothing else, shouldn't a note be added somewhere about the difference?

--

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave. 301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110 GNU tools for the ARM http://www.gnuarm.com

From:	Bruce McFarling
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	18 Jan 2005 20:17:44 -0800

rickman wrote:
> I was reading the Starting Forth web page and noticed that it refers
a
> lot to single and double integers being 32 and 64 bits rather than 1
and
> 2 cells. I checked the ANSI spec and it clearly says a cell size is
> implementation defined and not a fixed value (but a minimum of 16
bits).
> Wasn't the web version of Starting Forth going to be updated for
the
> current ANSI spec? Or is that something that was just going to be
> applied to the examples and not the whole document? Or has it just
not
> been done yet?
>
> If nothing else, shouldn't a note be added somewhere about the
difference?

You are merging two different projects in your mind. The
first is to make Starting Forth as last published available.
The target there was to match what was in print. That
flurry of typo corrections a while back was a later stage
of that. Thinking Forth is essentially Forth-83 standard.
The second is to bring out a version updated to ANS Forth.
That is the next cab in the rank.

From:	rickman
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:22:01 -0500

Bruce McFarling wrote:

> rickman wrote:
>
>>I was reading the Starting Forth web page and noticed that it refers
>
> a
>
>>lot to single and double integers being 32 and 64 bits rather than 1
>
> and
>
>>2 cells. I checked the ANSI spec and it clearly says a cell size is
>>implementation defined and not a fixed value (but a minimum of 16
>
> bits).
>
>> Wasn't the web version of Starting Forth going to be updated for
>
> the
>
>>current ANSI spec? Or is that something that was just going to be
>>applied to the examples and not the whole document? Or has it just
>
> not
>
>>been done yet?
>>
>>If nothing else, shouldn't a note be added somewhere about the
>
> difference?
>
> You are merging two different projects in your mind. The
> first is to make Starting Forth as last published available.
> The target there was to match what was in print. That
> flurry of typo corrections a while back was a later stage
> of that. Thinking Forth is essentially Forth-83 standard.
> The second is to bring out a version updated to ANS Forth.
> That is the next cab in the rank.

So no one is planning to update the Starting Forth text? That seems to
make this text rather out of date. I believe this was one of the main
reasons that Forth Inc did not want to continue publication of the text.
Why make a text available if it is obsolete?

Perhaps I don't understand what you wrote. Are you saying the next step
is to bring out an updated Thinking Forth, or an updated Starting Forth?

--

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave. 301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110 GNU tools for the ARM http://www.gnuarm.com

From:	Bruce McFarling
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	19 Jan 2005 07:43:42 -0800

rickman wrote:

> So no one is planning to update the Starting Forth text? That
> seems to make this text rather out of date. I believe this was
> one of the main reasons that Forth Inc did not want to continue
> publication of the text. Why make a text available if it is
> obsolete?

No, wait, I was the one confusing two different projects.
My only excuse is that I have just finished marking
96 2,500 word assignments, and some of my synapses are
temporarily fried.

I do not know which "the Starting Forth" web page
you are talking about, there are several. The one
I can see that seems to be talking about 32 and 64
bit values is the one that Marcel Hendrix has up.
It is very clear in the intro that code has been
ANS-ified, but makes a number of assumptions,
including 32 bit cells. I do not know if anyone
has tested that code to see how many different
systems it does work on correctly.

From:	rickman
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:57:56 -0500

Bruce McFarling wrote:

> rickman wrote:
>
>
>>So no one is planning to update the Starting Forth text? That
>>seems to make this text rather out of date. I believe this was
>>one of the main reasons that Forth Inc did not want to continue
>>publication of the text. Why make a text available if it is
>>obsolete?
>
>
> No, wait, I was the one confusing two different projects.
> My only excuse is that I have just finished marking
> 96 2,500 word assignments, and some of my synapses are
> temporarily fried.
>
> I do not know which "the Starting Forth" web page
> you are talking about, there are several. The one
> I can see that seems to be talking about 32 and 64
> bit values is the one that Marcel Hendrix has up.
> It is very clear in the intro that code has been
> ANS-ified, but makes a number of assumptions,
> including 32 bit cells. I do not know if anyone
> has tested that code to see how many different
> systems it does work on correctly.

Yes, it looks like I skimmed the intro a bit too fast. The one that
comes up first in a google search is
http://www.amresearch.com/starting_forth/. I do see where the ANSI
modifications were discussed and also found where a 32 bit forth is
"assumed". But still I think the text should be changed to indicate the
difference between an implementation choice and what the standard says.

If help is needed with this, I would be willing to offer my time.

--

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave. 301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110 GNU tools for the ARM http://www.gnuarm.com

From:	m-coughlin
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:18:52 -0500

rickman wrote:
>
> Bruce McFarling wrote:
>
> > rickman wrote:
> >
> >>So no one is planning to update the Starting Forth text?
> >>That seems to make this text rather out of date. I believe
> >>this was one of the main reasons that Forth Inc did not want
> >>to continue publication of the text. Why make a text
> >>available if it is obsolete?

Because the this text is the clearest one in existence. I
look at the situation differently. Why make the ANS standard
available if it does not result in clearer textbooks?

> > No, wait, I was the one confusing two different projects.
> > My only excuse is that I have just finished marking
> > 96 2,500 word assignments, and some of my synapses are
> > temporarily fried.
> >
> > I do not know which "the Starting Forth" web page
> > you are talking about, there are several. The one
> > I can see that seems to be talking about 32 and 64
> > bit values is the one that Marcel Hendrix has up.
> > It is very clear in the intro that code has been
> > ANS-ified, but makes a number of assumptions,
> > including 32 bit cells. I do not know if anyone
> > has tested that code to see how many different
> > systems it does work on correctly.
>
> Yes, it looks like I skimmed the intro a bit too fast.
> The one that comes up first in a google search is
> http://www.amresearch.com/starting_forth/ .

This page shows only a banner for the AM Research company on
my browser. Is their work on "Starting Forth" even ready for
public display?

> I do see where the ANSI modifications were discussed and also
> found where a 32 bit forth is "assumed". But still I think
> the text should be changed to indicate the difference between
> an implementation choice and what the standard says.
>
> If help is needed with this, I would be willing to offer my
> time.

After five or ten years of reading phony reasons why
"Starting Forth" could not be updated, Marcel Hendrix decided to
show his appreciation for it and the ANS standard by just doing
a complete rewrite. http://home.iae.nl/users/mhx/sf.html
Perhaps he would welcome suggestions for improvements.

--
Michael Coughlin m-coughlin@comcast.net Cambridge, MA USA

From:	rickman
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:33:10 -0500

m-coughlin wrote:
> Because the this text is the clearest one in existence. I
> look at the situation differently. Why make the ANS standard
> available if it does not result in clearer textbooks?

Yeah, well, I can't say that the purpose of a standard is to produce
text books. But whatever...

>>http://www.amresearch.com/starting_forth/ .
>
>
> This page shows only a banner for the AM Research company on
> my browser. Is their work on "Starting Forth" even ready for
> public display?

I can't tell you what is wrong with your browser. Perhaps you could
tell us a bit about which one you use and other pertinent info. There
are lots of people here who can help. ;)

It continues to show just fine on Netscape 7.2.

> After five or ten years of reading phony reasons why
> "Starting Forth" could not be updated, Marcel Hendrix decided to
> show his appreciation for it and the ANS standard by just doing
> a complete rewrite. http://home.iae.nl/users/mhx/sf.html
> Perhaps he would welcome suggestions for improvements.

You seem to have very extreme views. No one said it "could" not be
updated. Forth Inc said it "should" not be updated because it was
obsolete and they provide other books that they felt were just as good
or even better. Other people were hesitant to violate copyright.

BTW, I am not sure that Forth, Inc is not right. The Brodie book is
good in its simplicity, but lacks the regimen of a scholastic text book.
I would say it is better for amateurs or others who wish to get up to
speed writing basic code quickly, but I don't think this is the best
approach for those who are starting a project and need to learn forth in
a context of becoming maximally proficient in the minimum time. This
*radical* idea may start a flame war, but I expect that professionals
who are not familiar with Forth could do well with another style.

--

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave. 301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110 GNU tools for the ARM http://www.gnuarm.com

From:	Marc Olschok
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:52:45 +0000 (UTC)

rickman wrote:
> m-coughlin wrote:
>[...]
>>>http://www.amresearch.com/starting_forth/ .
>>
>>
>> This page shows only a banner for the AM Research company on
>> my browser. Is their work on "Starting Forth" even ready for
>> public display?
>
> I can't tell you what is wrong with your browser. Perhaps you could
> tell us a bit about which one you use and other pertinent info. There
> are lots of people here who can help. ;)
>
> It continues to show just fine on Netscape 7.2.

Also no problems with Lynx, Links or a direct GET from a text terminal.
It is simple and plain html.

Of course, instead of Apache they should perhaps use use Bernds
http-server (just to make the point of Forth :-)

Marc

From:	Ian Osgood
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	20 Jan 2005 10:21:17 -0800

In fact, Marcel is the original "author" of the pages mirrored on AMR.
Only slight modifications have been made (such as mentioning
compatibility with GNU Forth as well as Marcel's own iForth). It is
odd that Marcel didn't sign the "Comments on the Web Edition" section
on the introduction page.

And thanks again to Marcel for doing this very thorough web and ANS
adaption of "Starting Forth." His activity graph indicates that
increasing numbers of people are finding it.

Ian

From:	Marcel Hendrix
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:00:39 GMT

"Ian Osgood" writes Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?

> In fact, Marcel is the original "author" of the pages mirrored on AMR.
> Only slight modifications have been made (such as mentioning
> compatibility with GNU Forth as well as Marcel's own iForth). It is

No, AMR did not change that. I constantly revise the "Starting Forth"
on my pages, and AMR did not update their copy. (At the time there was a
good reason for copying and not linking, but that is not valid any
more -- I should hope :-)

> odd that Marcel didn't sign the "Comments on the Web Edition" section
> on the introduction page.

Should I? It is obvious from their original location.

The section on DO LOOP badly needs changes, are there any takers? I prefer
solutions that can do with only small changes to the existing graphics (which
were a hideous amount of work).

I did not want to make SF compatible with *any* ANS Forth because a book full
of ifs, buts, and warnings (Jack Woehr's book!) is not what I call a nice read
for a enthusiastic beginner ... IMHO.

-marcel

From:	rickman
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:37:11 -0500

Marcel Hendrix wrote:

> "Ian Osgood" writes Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
>
>
>>In fact, Marcel is the original "author" of the pages mirrored on AMR.
>>Only slight modifications have been made (such as mentioning
>>compatibility with GNU Forth as well as Marcel's own iForth). It is
>
>
> No, AMR did not change that. I constantly revise the "Starting Forth"
> on my pages, and AMR did not update their copy. (At the time there was a
> good reason for copying and not linking, but that is not valid any
> more -- I should hope :-)
>
>
>>odd that Marcel didn't sign the "Comments on the Web Edition" section
>>on the introduction page.
>
>
> Should I? It is obvious from their original location.
>
> The section on DO LOOP badly needs changes, are there any takers? I prefer
> solutions that can do with only small changes to the existing graphics (which
> were a hideous amount of work).

I would be happy to tackle that. What exactly is it that you don't like
about the section? Are you asking for it to be made compatible with
ANSI Forth?

> I did not want to make SF compatible with *any* ANS Forth because a book full
> of ifs, buts, and warnings (Jack Woehr's book!) is not what I call a nice read
> for a enthusiastic beginner ... IMHO.

I don't follow this. How does being ANSI compatible result in ifs, buts
and warnings?

--

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave. 301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110 GNU tools for the ARM http://www.gnuarm.com

From:	Richard Owlett
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:12:20 -0600

rickman wrote:
>[snip]
>
> I don't follow this. How does being ANSI compatible result in ifs, buts
> and warnings?
>

Cause _Starting Forth_ was pre-ANS ;}
I believe statement references long discussion of wisdom of reprinting
_Starting Forth_ as it depicted a pre-ANS FORTH.

From:	rickman
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:35:39 -0500

Richard Owlett wrote:

> rickman wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> I don't follow this. How does being ANSI compatible result in ifs,
>> buts and warnings?
>>
>
> Cause _Starting Forth_ was pre-ANS ;}
> I believe statement references long discussion of wisdom of reprinting
> _Starting Forth_ as it depicted a pre-ANS FORTH.

But the question is *why* converting the book to ANSI forth would
require the "ifs, buts and warnings". We have already established that
SF is pre-ANSI forth. I would think it to be just the opposite. Since
the book is not describing an ANSI forth, it should *include* all the
caveats for things like claiming that all integers are 32 bits and
doubles are 64 bits.

--

Rick Collins

rick.collins@XYarius.com

Arius - A Signal Processing Solutions Company
Specializing in DSP and FPGA design http://www.arius.com
4 King Ave. 301-682-7772 Voice
Frederick, MD 21701-3110 GNU tools for the ARM http://www.gnuarm.com

From:	Elizabeth D. Rather
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:46:47 -0800

"rickman" wrote in message
news:Wt-dnYqaiPLAr23cRVn-gw@adelphia.com...
> Richard Owlett wrote:
>
> > rickman wrote:
> >
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> I don't follow this. How does being ANSI compatible result in ifs,
> >> buts and warnings?
> >>
> >
> > Cause _Starting Forth_ was pre-ANS ;}
> > I believe statement references long discussion of wisdom of reprinting
> > _Starting Forth_ as it depicted a pre-ANS FORTH.
>
> But the question is *why* converting the book to ANSI forth would
> require the "ifs, buts and warnings". We have already established that
> SF is pre-ANSI forth. I would think it to be just the opposite. Since
> the book is not describing an ANSI forth, it should *include* all the
> caveats for things like claiming that all integers are 32 bits and
> doubles are 64 bits.

SF also assumed an ITC implementation, and a lot of specific implementation
details. One would either have to extensively revise those sections or (in
some cases) omit them. I'm sure it's possible to do it gracefully, but it
will require a lot of thought and imagination.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

--
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc. +1 310-491-3356
5155 W. Rosecrans Ave. #1018 Fax: +1 310-978-9454
Hawthorne, CA 90250
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================

From:	Albert van der Horst
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	21 Jan 2005 09:33:07 GMT

In article <10v0gncmh9ho3de@news.supernews.com>,
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>
>SF also assumed an ITC implementation, and a lot of specific implementation
>details. One would either have to extensively revise those sections or (in
>some cases) omit them. I'm sure it's possible to do it gracefully, but it
>will require a lot of thought and imagination.

Indeed SF was written with a specific implementation in mind,
and mhx has rewritten it with a specific implementation in mind.
At first sight it would make an ideal companion volume to an
ITC Forth implementation like ciforth, but I looked into it, and
I would need additional and changed cartoons. The cartoons is
an important point of the attraction of the book, and few have the
ability to make them.
The feeling of empowerment would be less if the part about the inner
working of interpreter and executioner were left out.

>
>Cheers,
>Elizabeth
>
>--

Groetjes Albert.

--
Albert van der Horst,Oranjestr 8,3511 RA UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
One man-hour to invent,
One man-week to implement,
One lawyer-year to patent.

From:	Elizabeth D. Rather
Subject:	Re: Starting Forth, updated for ANS?
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:36:29 -0800

"Albert van der Horst" wrote in message
news:ianuj7.lgr@spenarnc.xs4all.nl...
> In article <10v0gncmh9ho3de@news.supernews.com>,
> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> >
> >SF also assumed an ITC implementation, and a lot of specific
implementation
> >details. One would either have to extensively revise those sections or
(in
> >some cases) omit them. I'm sure it's possible to do it gracefully, but
it
> >will require a lot of thought and imagination.
>
> Indeed SF was written with a specific implementation in mind,
> and mhx has rewritten it with a specific implementation in mind.
> At first sight it would make an ideal companion volume to an
> ITC Forth implementation like ciforth, but I looked into it, and
> I would need additional and changed cartoons. The cartoons is
> an important point of the attraction of the book, and few have the
> ability to make them.
> The feeling of empowerment would be less if the part about the inner
> working of interpreter and executioner were left out.

One is hardly "empowered" by learing tricks that won't work on many modern
Forths. I can certainly see the advantage of having a concrete model to
discuss, but it's important to make it clear that this is only one of
several possible implementation strategies. A lot of people assume that
Forth *is* ITC by definition, and that has never been true. Chuck was
experimenting with other strategies back in the 70's.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

--
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc. +1 310-491-3356
5155 W. Rosecrans Ave. #1018 Fax: +1 310-978-9454
Hawthorne, CA 90250
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================