f



Id love to surf web with 4megs ram forth pc using forth and forth chips

when will this happen?

cant wait!!
0
the_gavino_himself
9/27/2013 9:52:10 PM
comp.lang.forth 7148 articles. 0 followers. markrobertwills (871) is leader. Post Follow

44 Replies
997 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 27

On 9/27/2013 11:52 AM, the_gavino_himself wrote:
> when will this happen?
>
> cant wait!!
>

I'll happen when someone comes up with several $M in funding.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
0
Elizabeth
9/27/2013 10:35:59 PM
Elizabeth D Rather wrote:

> On 9/27/2013 11:52 AM, the_gavino_himself wrote:
>> when will this happen?
>>
>> cant wait!!
>>
> 
> I'll happen when someone comes up with several $M in funding.

With 4 megs of RAM?  I wouldn't do that even if I had large funding.  This 
is not enough memory to display a single cat image, so it's not worth 
considering.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/

0
Bernd
10/1/2013 10:01:15 PM
On Tuesday, October 1, 2013 11:01:15 PM UTC+1, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> With 4 megs of RAM?  I wouldn't do that even if I had large funding.  Thi=
s=20
> is not enough memory to display a single cat image, so it's not worth=20
> considering.

This is true. Cat images are big. Especially images of lions - because they=
 are really big.

We could integrate image recognition capabilities into the browser, where a=
ll detected images of cats and lions are replaced with a pre-approved pictu=
re of a cuddly kitten. Kittens are small, so the image will be much smaller=
 too. And they are cuddly. So everyone wins.

I'll get right onto it!
0
Mark
10/2/2013 7:35:34 AM
On 10/2/2013 3:35 AM, Mark Wills wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 1, 2013 11:01:15 PM UTC+1, Bernd Paysan wrote:
>> With 4 megs of RAM?  I wouldn't do that even if I had large funding.  This
>> is not enough memory to display a single cat image, so it's not worth
>> considering.
>
> This is true. Cat images are big. Especially images of lions - because they are really big.
>
> We could integrate image recognition capabilities into the browser, where all detected images of cats and lions are replaced with a pre-approved picture of a cuddly kitten. Kittens are small, so the image will be much smaller too. And they are cuddly. So everyone wins.
>
> I'll get right onto it!

I'm not sure the zookeepers would agree.  Not everyone wins.  :(

-- 

Rick
0
rickman
10/2/2013 8:00:05 AM
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> writes:
> With 4 megs of RAM?  I wouldn't do that even if I had large funding.  This 
> is not enough memory to display a single cat image, so it's not worth 
> considering.

Use Forth minimalism.  A picture of a black cat in a coal bin compresses
to almost nothing.
0
Paul
10/2/2013 8:34:11 AM
In article <l2fgnb$pqc$1@online.de>, Bernd Paysan  <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote:
>Elizabeth D Rather wrote:
>
>> On 9/27/2013 11:52 AM, the_gavino_himself wrote:
>>> when will this happen?
>>>
>>> cant wait!!
>>>
>>
>> I'll happen when someone comes up with several $M in funding.
>
>With 4 megs of RAM?  I wouldn't do that even if I had large funding.  This
>is not enough memory to display a single cat image, so it's not worth
>considering.

What happened to the Forth mentality? Sites with pictures aren't worth it.
Just download the text, doable in 4 Mbyte.
>

>--
>Bernd Paysan
>"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
>http://bernd-paysan.de/
>
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

0
albert
10/2/2013 10:26:22 AM
On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 9:34:11 AM UTC+1, Paul Rubin wrote:

> Use Forth minimalism.  A picture of a black cat in a coal bin compresses
> to almost nothing.

See. That's why I like the Forth community. You guys are just geniuses!
0
Mark
10/2/2013 2:30:41 PM
On 2013-10-02, Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> In article <l2fgnb$pqc$1@online.de>, Bernd Paysan  <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> wrote:
>>Elizabeth D Rather wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/27/2013 11:52 AM, the_gavino_himself wrote:
>>>> when will this happen?
>>>>
>>>> cant wait!!
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'll happen when someone comes up with several $M in funding.
>>
>>With 4 megs of RAM?  I wouldn't do that even if I had large funding.  This
>>is not enough memory to display a single cat image, so it's not worth
>>considering.
>
> What happened to the Forth mentality? Sites with pictures aren't worth it.
> Just download the text, doable in 4 Mbyte.

And what's wrong with ASCII text cat pictures or ANSI-escape sequence cat
pictures? Surely possible in a few kilobytes ;-)

Bill
0
Bill
10/2/2013 2:41:07 PM
On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 3:41:07 PM UTC+1, Bill Richards wrote:
> And what's wrong with ASCII text cat pictures or ANSI-escape sequence cat
> pictures? Surely possible in a few kilobytes ;-)

With this quality brain-storming we're going to have this browser written in no time!

I've already found a resource for the ASCII art cats:

http://user.xmission.com/~emailbox/ascii_cats.htm

I think we now have nearly everything we need to write Firecat.
0
Mark
10/2/2013 3:25:00 PM
On 10/2/2013 11:25 AM, Mark Wills wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 3:41:07 PM UTC+1, Bill Richards wrote:
>> And what's wrong with ASCII text cat pictures or ANSI-escape sequence cat
>> pictures? Surely possible in a few kilobytes ;-)
>
> With this quality brain-storming we're going to have this browser written in no time!
>
> I've already found a resource for the ASCII art cats:
>
> http://user.xmission.com/~emailbox/ascii_cats.htm
>
> I think we now have nearly everything we need to write Firecat.

ROFLMAO

-- 

Rick
0
rickman
10/3/2013 3:13:45 AM
On Friday, September 27, 2013 5:52:10 PM UTC-4, the_gavino_himself wrote:
> when will this happen?
> 

Forth is usually used to program things the world hasn't seen yet. I think the world has seen a web browser or two.
0
Brad
10/4/2013 3:09:03 PM
Brad Eckert wrote:
> On Friday, September 27, 2013 5:52:10 PM UTC-4, the_gavino_himself wrote:
> > when will this happen?
> >
>
> Forth is usually used to program things the world hasn't seen yet.

This is true of most languages.

> I think the world has
> seen a web browser or two.

Other languages got there first.

There's good reason Forth users prefer to talk about Forth Standards.  It's
because they can't think of anything to write that hasn't already been written
in another language.



0
Ed
10/5/2013 1:45:15 AM
On Friday, September 27, 2013 4:52:10 PM UTC-5, the_gavino_himself wrote:
> when will this happen?
> 
> 
> 
> cant wait!!

I'd prefer a FORTH OS running on recent HW.

And I'd love to do a USB OS.

All would require big $$$.

A FORTH subnet surfer would be where I'd start if I had my way.
0
Clyde
10/15/2013 11:45:54 PM
On Tue, 15 Oct 2013, Clyde W. Phillips Jr. wrote:

> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 16:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Clyde W. Phillips Jr. <cwpjr02@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
> Subject: Re: Id love to surf web with 4megs ram forth pc using forth and forth
>      chips
> 
> On Friday, September 27, 2013 4:52:10 PM UTC-5, the_gavino_himself wrote:
>> when will this happen?
>>
>>
>>
>> cant wait!!
>
> I'd prefer a FORTH OS running on recent HW.
>
> And I'd love to do a USB OS.
>
> All would require big $$$.
>
> A FORTH subnet surfer would be where I'd start if I had my way.
>

I disagree with the big $$$ assertion.  Linux started as a student 
project, and has evolved to where it is today.  A generic Forth OS with a 
degree of portability can be had quite reasonably, even as an open source 
hobby-type project.

The one thing that would simplify the portability is to use a device tree 
to describe the target, in a manner similar to the Flattened Device Tree 
model used by the PPC folks.  This will describe memory, registers, GPIO, 
i2C buses and various components of the board, as well as the SoC itself 
to produce a "bus model".  Drivers can then be developed generically.

Basically, one would implement basic boot code in assembler, plus the 
primitives (Ting has suggested somewhere between 20 and 30 or so), and the 
rest would be written in Forth.

There are any number of embedded boards commercially available which would 
be decent targets ...

Cheers,
Rob.
0
Spam
10/16/2013 3:20:43 PM
In article <alpine.BSF.2.00.1310161110440.50696@yoko.controlq.com>,
 <Spam@ControlQ.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Oct 2013, Clyde W. Phillips Jr. wrote:
>
>> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 16:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Clyde W. Phillips Jr. <cwpjr02@gmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
>> Subject: Re: Id love to surf web with 4megs ram forth pc using forth and forth
>>      chips
>>
>> On Friday, September 27, 2013 4:52:10 PM UTC-5, the_gavino_himself wrote:
>>> when will this happen?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> cant wait!!
>>
>> I'd prefer a FORTH OS running on recent HW.
>>
>> And I'd love to do a USB OS.
>>
>> All would require big $$$.
>>
>> A FORTH subnet surfer would be where I'd start if I had my way.
>>
>
>I disagree with the big $$$ assertion.  Linux started as a student
>project, and has evolved to where it is today.  A generic Forth OS with a
>degree of portability can be had quite reasonably, even as an open source
>hobby-type project.

This misrepresents the situation. Torvalds jumped on the GNU-train that
was running 200 km/h and had consumed hundreds of millions of dollars in
public funding (well spent, IMO).

>
>The one thing that would simplify the portability is to use a device tree
>to describe the target, in a manner similar to the Flattened Device Tree
>model used by the PPC folks.  This will describe memory, registers, GPIO,
>i2C buses and various components of the board, as well as the SoC itself
>to produce a "bus model".  Drivers can then be developed generically.

We don't have to start from nothing. There is open boot, and "all" we have
to do is to port that to Pentium machines.

>
>Basically, one would implement basic boot code in assembler, plus the
>primitives (Ting has suggested somewhere between 20 and 30 or so), and the
>rest would be written in Forth.

The rest... Have you looked at an obscure language like Python recently?
No OS written in Python. Still getting an overview of what
libraries are available is mind-boggling.

>
>There are any number of embedded boards commercially available which would
>be decent targets ...

>
>Cheers,
>Rob.


Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

0
albert
10/17/2013 12:03:15 PM
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Albert van der Horst wrote:

>> I disagree with the big $$$ assertion.  Linux started as a student
>> project, and has evolved to where it is today.  A generic Forth OS with a
>> degree of portability can be had quite reasonably, even as an open source
>> hobby-type project.
>
> This misrepresents the situation. Torvalds jumped on the GNU-train that
> was running 200 km/h and had consumed hundreds of millions of dollars in
> public funding (well spent, IMO).

True, a readily available C compiler was a pre-requisite for Linux, but a 
Forth based X-assembler for a given target fulfills that need.  In 
addition, knowledge of the boot code/initialization for the target.  That 
does not constitute a huge portion of the OS, but would cover most of the 
machine dependencies.

>
>>
>> The one thing that would simplify the portability is to use a device tree
>> to describe the target, in a manner similar to the Flattened Device Tree
>> model used by the PPC folks.  This will describe memory, registers, GPIO,
>> i2C buses and various components of the board, as well as the SoC itself
>> to produce a "bus model".  Drivers can then be developed generically.
>
> We don't have to start from nothing. There is open boot, and "all" we have
> to do is to port that to Pentium machines.

Assuming this belongs on a desktop.  Arm, PPC and MIPS would be better 
first targets ... and again, I would stress the FDT approach to describe 
the platform/architecture to the OS -- the modern PC's firmware with bus 
instantiation is complex, but is not found on embedded targets.

>>
>> Basically, one would implement basic boot code in assembler, plus the
>> primitives (Ting has suggested somewhere between 20 and 30 or so), and the
>> rest would be written in Forth.
>
> The rest... Have you looked at an obscure language like Python recently?
> No OS written in Python. Still getting an overview of what
> libraries are available is mind-boggling.

Python is a general purpose high level scripting language with a degree of 
object orientation, and decent performance.  It naturally attracts coders 
where Forth does its best to drive them away.  I'm not sure what your 
point is here, other than Python is a wildly successful scripting language 
whereas Forth is relegated to fringe status.
0
Spam
10/17/2013 3:40:18 PM
In article <alpine.BSF.2.00.1310171128430.51137@yoko.controlq.com>,
 <Spam@ControlQ.com> wrote:
>
>On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Albert van der Horst wrote:
>
>>> I disagree with the big $$$ assertion.  Linux started as a student
>>> project, and has evolved to where it is today.  A generic Forth OS with a
>>> degree of portability can be had quite reasonably, even as an open source
>>> hobby-type project.
>>
>> This misrepresents the situation. Torvalds jumped on the GNU-train that
>> was running 200 km/h and had consumed hundreds of millions of dollars in
>> public funding (well spent, IMO).
>
>True, a readily available C compiler was a pre-requisite for Linux, but a
>Forth based X-assembler for a given target fulfills that need.  In
>addition, knowledge of the boot code/initialization for the target.  That
>does not constitute a huge portion of the OS, but would cover most of the
>machine dependencies.

Torvalds need not worry about You forget bash lex yacc awk cp ls passwd man info zip mount nroff mail ping
at cron

Must I go on? That is all part of GNU. A Forth based X-assembler gives you
nothing of those.

>
>>
>>>
>>> The one thing that would simplify the portability is to use a device tree
>>> to describe the target, in a manner similar to the Flattened Device Tree
>>> model used by the PPC folks.  This will describe memory, registers, GPIO,
>>> i2C buses and various components of the board, as well as the SoC itself
>>> to produce a "bus model".  Drivers can then be developed generically.
>>
>> We don't have to start from nothing. There is open boot, and "all" we have
>> to do is to port that to Pentium machines.
>
>Assuming this belongs on a desktop.  Arm, PPC and MIPS would be better
>first targets ... and again, I would stress the FDT approach to describe
>the platform/architecture to the OS -- the modern PC's firmware with bus
>instantiation is complex, but is not found on embedded targets.
>
>>>
>>> Basically, one would implement basic boot code in assembler, plus the
>>> primitives (Ting has suggested somewhere between 20 and 30 or so), and the
>>> rest would be written in Forth.
>>
>> The rest... Have you looked at an obscure language like Python recently?
>> No OS written in Python. Still getting an overview of what
>> libraries are available is mind-boggling.
>
>Python is a general purpose high level scripting language with a degree of
>object orientation, and decent performance.  It naturally attracts coders
>where Forth does its best to drive them away.  I'm not sure what your
>point is here, other than Python is a wildly successful scripting language
>whereas Forth is relegated to fringe status.

My point is the amount of libraries needed to start an OS is mind-boggling.
It takes a Gavino to casually propose things like this.

Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

0
albert
10/17/2013 7:58:04 PM
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Albert van der Horst wrote:

> Date: 17 Oct 2013 19:58:04 GMT
> From: Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl>
> Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
> Subject: Re: Id love to surf web with 4megs ram forth pc using forth and forth
>      chips
> 
> In article <alpine.BSF.2.00.1310171128430.51137@yoko.controlq.com>,
> <Spam@ControlQ.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Albert van der Horst wrote:
>>
>>>> I disagree with the big $$$ assertion.  Linux started as a student
>>>> project, and has evolved to where it is today.  A generic Forth OS with a
>>>> degree of portability can be had quite reasonably, even as an open source
>>>> hobby-type project.
>>>
>>> This misrepresents the situation. Torvalds jumped on the GNU-train that
>>> was running 200 km/h and had consumed hundreds of millions of dollars in
>>> public funding (well spent, IMO).
>>
>> True, a readily available C compiler was a pre-requisite for Linux, but a
>> Forth based X-assembler for a given target fulfills that need.  In
>> addition, knowledge of the boot code/initialization for the target.  That
>> does not constitute a huge portion of the OS, but would cover most of the
>> machine dependencies.
>
> Torvalds need not worry about You forget bash lex yacc awk cp ls passwd man info zip mount nroff mail ping
> at cron
>
> Must I go on? That is all part of GNU. A Forth based X-assembler gives you
> nothing of those.

Hosting your X-dev environment on Unix/Linux gives you all of that.  Are 
you seriously proposing to re-implement all of [U|Li]nux in Forth?

Trying to re-implement Linux is pointless (we already have it). 
Implementing a small but useful RTOS/Boot environment is potentially 
useful -- but shooting for full posix compliance is a fool's errand 
(thus explaining Gavino's interest in doing so).

>> Python is a general purpose high level scripting language with a degree of
>> object orientation, and decent performance.  It naturally attracts coders
>> where Forth does its best to drive them away.  I'm not sure what your
>> point is here, other than Python is a wildly successful scripting language
>> whereas Forth is relegated to fringe status.
>
> My point is the amount of libraries needed to start an OS is mind-boggling.
> It takes a Gavino to casually propose things like this.
>
> Groetjes Albert
>

Your use of the term "library" reveals a bias, methinks, and possibly 
some "in the box" thinking.  This surprises me given your recent foray 
into re-doing JonesForth ... for fun, I presume.

Complexity depends upon the OS.  API's for scheduling, interrupt handling 
and simple process creation/suspension/preemption/deletion don't take 
much.  The bigger chore is device drivers for I2C, flash, serial i/o 
(usb/uart) etc., and that is significantly helped by the use of device 
trees to describe the resources.

It easy to say "no" to a non-trivial project, and much harder to find the 
rationale to proceed.  Personally, I look forward to the day when GavinOS 
(TM) is available, and running FireFox in emulation on multiple platforms. 8-)

Cheers,
Rob.
0
Spam
10/17/2013 9:22:12 PM
On 10/17/13 2:03 AM, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> In article <alpine.BSF.2.00.1310161110440.50696@yoko.controlq.com>,
>   <Spam@ControlQ.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Oct 2013, Clyde W. Phillips Jr. wrote:
....
>> The one thing that would simplify the portability is to use a device tree
>> to describe the target, in a manner similar to the Flattened Device Tree
>> model used by the PPC folks.  This will describe memory, registers, GPIO,
>> i2C buses and various components of the board, as well as the SoC itself
>> to produce a "bus model".  Drivers can then be developed generically.
>
> We don't have to start from nothing. There is open boot, and "all" we have
> to do is to port that to Pentium machines.

Well, there exists an Open Boot port for Pentiums. But Oppen Boot is not 
an OS, far from it! It is designed to boot an OS, not be one.

The first chore, and it's a major one, is to design this thing. Exactly 
what capabilities should it include? What kind of application 
interfaces? etc. The design phase alone could consume months.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
0
Elizabeth
10/17/2013 9:32:47 PM
On 10/17/13 11:22 AM, Spam@ControlQ.com wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Albert van der Horst wrote:
>
....
>>> Forth based X-assembler for a given target fulfills that need.  In
>>> addition, knowledge of the boot code/initialization for the target.
>>> That
>>> does not constitute a huge portion of the OS, but would cover most of
>>> the
>>> machine dependencies.
>>
>> Torvalds need not worry about You forget bash lex yacc awk cp ls
>> passwd man info zip mount nroff mail ping
>> at cron
>>
>> Must I go on? That is all part of GNU. A Forth based X-assembler gives
>> you
>> nothing of those.
>
> Hosting your X-dev environment on Unix/Linux gives you all of that.  Are
> you seriously proposing to re-implement all of [U|Li]nux in Forth?
>
> Trying to re-implement Linux is pointless (we already have it).
> Implementing a small but useful RTOS/Boot environment is potentially
> useful -- but shooting for full posix compliance is a fool's errand
> (thus explaining Gavino's interest in doing so).

Exactly. The first thing you have to do is define exactly what this 
project is, what market it's intended to serve, and what capabilities it 
will need to serve that market. This is far from clear right now!

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
0
Elizabeth
10/17/2013 9:45:08 PM
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 08:03:15 -0400, Albert van der Horst  
<albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:

> We don't have to start from nothing. There is open boot, and "all" we  
> have to do is to port that to Pentium machines.

Sorry, I don't mean to put you on the spot, but which project do you
mean by "open boot"?  OpenBoot, OpenFirmware, OpenBIOS, CoreBoot, etc?


Rod Pemberton
-- 
84Nk5y once again, proving artists, citizens, authorities from around
the world CAN'T recognize ART when they SEE it.  Rats, chimps, gays,
un-angelic angels, shell-shocked soldiers, distopian childhoods ...
Whats next?  We have Youtube where it's REAL, in COLOR, without need
of monochrome stenciled spray paint ... BANKSY, the world is unchanged.
0
Rod
10/18/2013 8:02:14 AM
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 15:58:04 -0400, Albert van der Horst  
<albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:

> My point is the amount of libraries needed to start an OS is  
> mind-boggling.

You just need a full featured C compiler to code an OS in C.
That's it.  30% or so of the C language is independent of
the host and another 40% is custom to each host, but works
the same across different platforms.  30% is not portable.
Of course, a full featured C compiler provides inline assembly
which is needed on the x86 platform to provide special
x86 processor instructions.  However, no C libraries
are needed to bootstrap an OS in C.  A C library isn't that
dependent on an OS either.  To build a C library, you only
need about 18 to 20 functions provided by the OS, plus a
large amount of C code to implement the library.  Of course,
an efficient C library can use over 200 functions provided
by the OS.

I'm not sure what the exact equivalent would be for Forth,
but most likely it's just the base Forth language plus some
assembly, perhaps meta-compilation (cross-compiling...) too.

If you're interested in bootstrapping an OS, come on over
to news://alt.os.development or http://wiki.osdev.org.

But, be forewarned that most guys either code an OS in
x86 assembly or C.  Very few use C++.  Very few develop
for non-x86.  I've never heard of Forth being used, probably
because Forth either is an OS already or isn't, depending
on the implementation.


Rod Pemberton
-- 
84Nk5y once again, proving artists, citizens, authorities from around
the world CAN'T recognize ART when they SEE it.  Rats, chimps, gays,
un-angelic angels, shell-shocked soldiers, distopian childhoods ...
Whats next?  We have Youtube where it's REAL, in COLOR, without need
of monochrome stenciled spray paint ... BANKSY, the world is unchanged.
0
Rod
10/18/2013 8:02:34 AM
> But, be forewarned that most guys either code an OS in
> 
> x86 assembly or C.  Very few use C++.  Very few develop
> 
> for non-x86.  I've never heard of Forth being used, probably
> 
> because Forth either is an OS already or isn't, depending
> 
> on the implementation.

There is no C required to run a machine. I've implemented a 64 bit (native Forth) operating system for the PC using assembler, Forth-like macros and Forth only. 
0
Stefan
10/18/2013 2:01:00 PM
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:

>> Hosting your X-dev environment on Unix/Linux gives you all of that.  Are
>> you seriously proposing to re-implement all of [U|Li]nux in Forth?
>> 
>> Trying to re-implement Linux is pointless (we already have it).
>> Implementing a small but useful RTOS/Boot environment is potentially
>> useful -- but shooting for full posix compliance is a fool's errand
>> (thus explaining Gavino's interest in doing so).
>
> Exactly. The first thing you have to do is define exactly what this project 
> is, what market it's intended to serve, and what capabilities it will need to 
> serve that market. This is far from clear right now!
>
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth

Cooler heads prevail!

I would point at the remarkable FreeRTOS project for scoping ideas. 
Better yet, a full featured forth which runs on FreeRTOS might just be the 
ticket ... This alludes to Albert's suggestion that one might gain an 
advantage by standing on the shoulders of giants, though his point 
referred to the Gnu tool chain and libraries.  It also focuses upon 
Forth's strengths in the embedded domain.

One might hope also for this project to be actually useful, that a 
permissive license be used, and NOT GPL, but who knows what Gavino might 
do in order to run FireCat 8-)??
0
Spam
10/18/2013 5:33:19 PM
On 10/18/13 4:01 AM, Stefan Mauerhofer wrote:
>
>> But, be forewarned that most guys either code an OS in
>>
>> x86 assembly or C.  Very few use C++.  Very few develop
>>
>> for non-x86.  I've never heard of Forth being used, probably
>>
>> because Forth either is an OS already or isn't, depending
>>
>> on the implementation.
>
> There is no C required to run a machine. I've implemented a 64 bit (native Forth) operating system for the PC using assembler, Forth-like macros and Forth only.
>

Greg Bailey has supported such a system for many years, as a file & 
email server for companies with >1,000 users.

Greg's native Forth OSs are specifically tailored to their applications, 
however, and I suspect yours may be as well. Opening up such a system as 
a general purpose OS capable of running random user programs written in 
whatever language with a full web surfer would still be a non-trivial 
project that needs to be carefully designed.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
0
Elizabeth
10/18/2013 6:53:47 PM
On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 10:01:00 -0400, Stefan Mauerhofer  
<smauerhofer@androsoft.ch> wrote:

>
>> But, be forewarned that most guys either code an OS in
>> x86 assembly or C.  Very few use C++.  Very few develop
>> for non-x86.  I've never heard of Forth being used, probably
>> because Forth either is an OS already or isn't, depending
>> on the implementation.
>
> There is no C required to run a machine. I've implemented a
> 64 bit (native Forth) operating system for the PC using
> assembler, Forth-like macros and Forth only.

In general, I already said that.

There are some people who implement the OS portion of Forth
for their version of Forth.  One of many such examples:

Andy Valencia's ForthOS
http://www.forthos.org/

He recently posted to alt.os.development, BTW.


Rod Pemberton
0
Rod
10/19/2013 1:19:18 AM

>> With 4 megs of RAM?  I wouldn't do that even if I had large funding.  This
>> is not enough memory to display a single cat image, so it's not worth
>> considering.
> 
> What happened to the Forth mentality? Sites with pictures aren't worth it.
> Just download the text, doable in 4 Mbyte.

Forth style requires to have a close look at the conditions first:

* 4 MB RAM
* Surf
* with Forth (or on Forth chips).

The most simple solution:

Dust of hardware of last century
Compile an old Linux kernel
Install Busybox and Lynx or Links - good old textmode browser I checked my Emails with on VT100 terminals in university :-)
And finally, to match criteria, install a Forth of your choice.
Oh, please, could we have the legendary welcome boot sound of the Silicon Graphics Indy boxes ?

Done.

This way we have filled the 4 MB RAM properly.

With 64kb RAM limit, it is already done, but still lacks Forth:

Do you know Contiki which gives you IPv6 and a browser on a Commodore 64 or a microcontroller ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contiki

If you have never seen retrocomputing graphics demos before, you probably cannot imagine doing great images on the fly. Scan line interrupts pop to my mind...
But... personally I like the black cat in a coal bin most :-D Thank you for the laugh !

Matthias
0
Matthias
10/25/2013 10:46:48 AM
my win 3.1 pc with 4m ram displayed tons of stuff asdide from cats in early netscape!!
0
the_gavino_himself
11/7/2013 1:00:25 AM
well al u need is working web browser and some kinda way to save files....with tcp/ip and drivers for usb keyboard n mouse

try for windows 3.1 and netscape

in 1% code fo course
0
c
11/7/2013 5:24:25 PM
On 11/7/13 7:24 AM, c-gschuette@neogov.net wrote:
> well al u need is working web browser and some kinda way to save files....with tcp/ip and drivers for usb keyboard n mouse
>
> try for windows 3.1 and netscape
>
> in 1% code fo course
>

And what would be the market for this 30-yr-old technology?

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
0
Elizabeth
11/7/2013 5:38:31 PM
On Thu, 07 Nov 2013 12:24:25 -0500, <c-gschuette@neogov.net> wrote:

> well al u need is working web browser and some kinda way to save  
> files....with tcp/ip and drivers for usb keyboard n mouse
>
> try for windows 3.1 and netscape
>
> in 1% code fo course

Well Gavino (a.k.a. Gavin Schuette),

That wouldn't be a "Forth PC using Forth and Forth chips"
would it?

I'm amazed you just recommend using a non-Forth solution.
You've rejected that idea from others repeatedly, including
me, over the course of a number of years.  Are you just
being the internet "pest" that numerous other Usenet groups,
IRC channels, online forums, claim you are?  Is that even
your real name?  Did you hack that IP?


Rod Pemberton
0
Rod
11/8/2013 1:07:28 AM
What idea was rejected?

To surf the net without windows mac or linux/bsd would be fun esp on 1% the code or less!!!

and especily on forth cpu!

0
the_gavino_himself
11/16/2013 6:00:41 PM
On Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:00:41 -0500, the_gavino_himself  
<visphatesjava@gmail.com> wrote:

> What idea was rejected?
>

You seemed to reject the idea of a "Forth PC using Forth
and Forth chips" by suggesting one should use "windows 3.1
and netscape" instead.  Why would you suggest that if you
hadn't rejected a Forth PC?

> To surf the net without windows mac or linux/bsd would
> be fun esp on 1% the code or less!!!
>

I equate the 1% of the code or less comment to mean slow,
since minimal code like that is only possible with threaded
code, which means an interpreted Forth.  I honestly don't
see how this is any different from using a Commodore 64 or
Timex Sinclair 1000 to browse the web.

If you're using a compiled Forth, the compiled code will
be about the same size as compiled C, likely slightly larger
since not as much work has been done to optimize Forth as
compare to C.  The operations must be converted to the host
processor's assembly.  If the code is well written and highly
optimized, the assembly code is going to result in near
identical code for both, and therefore be the same size
for both.  Why?  You can't achieve a greater efficiency
than the most optimal solution for that processor.  If
both C and Forth can generate the same code, why bother
with Forth?  Ditto Fortran, Pascal, Perl, Lisp, BASIC...

> and especily on forth cpu!

First, please learn the difference between a CPU and
microprocessor.  You mean microprocessor, sometimes
abbreviated with the lowercase greek letter mu and 'p'.
Of course, most keyboards don't have mu, but have 'u',
so sometimes posted as 'up', e.g., "forth up".

Second, that can improve speed, but can it improve speed
enough?  Intel, AMD, ARM, etc are *not* producing Forth
microprocessors.  So, at best, you have much, much older
microprocessor technology being used, unless Chuck Moore
is involved.  In which case, the processor is comparable
to other modern non-Forth designs, but usually no better.
If C.M. is not involved, the performance is much worse,
comparatively.

Given all of that above, what is the point?  To me,
it seems you don't really think much about the claims
you make.  You just seem to say: "It's cool!"  So, it's
cool, but it's also irrelevant and useless.  So, why
bother?  If it's just a novelty, who cares?  If you do,
make and sell some "do nothing" machines.


Rod Pemberton
0
Rod
11/16/2013 10:22:00 PM
On 11/16/13 12:22 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:00:41 -0500, the_gavino_himself
> <visphatesjava@gmail.com> wrote:
>
....
>> To surf the net without windows mac or linux/bsd would
>> be fun esp on 1% the code or less!!!
>>
>
> I equate the 1% of the code or less comment to mean slow,
> since minimal code like that is only possible with threaded
> code, which means an interpreted Forth.  I honestly don't
> see how this is any different from using a Commodore 64 or
> Timex Sinclair 1000 to browse the web.

Actually, optimized, compiled Forth turns out to be smaller than 
threaded code.

> If you're using a compiled Forth, the compiled code will
> be about the same size as compiled C, likely slightly larger
> since not as much work has been done to optimize Forth as
> compare to C.  The operations must be converted to the host
> processor's assembly.  If the code is well written and highly
> optimized, the assembly code is going to result in near
> identical code for both, and therefore be the same size
> for both.  Why?  You can't achieve a greater efficiency
> than the most optimal solution for that processor.  If
> both C and Forth can generate the same code, why bother
> with Forth?  Ditto Fortran, Pascal, Perl, Lisp, BASIC...

If it's well-factored, it will be smaller, often much smaller, with 
about the same performance. The tradeoffs are different because 
subroutine calls are considerably more expensive (in both size and 
microseconds) in C and other languages because of the cost of managing 
the calling sequence. Therefore, well-factored Forth will have a lot 
more calls and less repeated code.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
0
Elizabeth
11/16/2013 11:53:05 PM
Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
> 
> Actually, optimized, compiled Forth turns out to be smaller than 
> threaded code.

Hmm.  Optimized compiled Forth can be smaller than, say, 32-bit
threaded code, but it's not smaller than all forms of threaded code,
some of which can be extremely dense.

> On 11/16/13 12:22 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
>> If you're using a compiled Forth, the compiled code will be about
>> the same size as compiled C, likely slightly larger since not as
>> much work has been done to optimize Forth as compare to C.  The
>> operations must be converted to the host processor's assembly.  If
>> the code is well written and highly optimized, the assembly code is
>> going to result in near identical code for both,

That's true if you solve problems in the same way in both languages,
but IME you probably don't: Forth and C encourage different problem-
solving styles, in particular the way that programs are factored, so
the solutions aren't going to be the same.  It's hard to define this
in a precise way, but IMO there is such a thing as Forthly design.

>> and therefore be the same size for both.  Why?  You can't achieve a
>> greater efficiency than the most optimal solution for that
>> processor.  If both C and Forth can generate the same code, why
>> bother with Forth?

But if both Language X and Forth can generate the same code, why
bother with X?

Andrew.
0
Andrew
11/17/2013 10:17:32 AM
Andrew Haley wrote:
> That's true if you solve problems in the same way in both languages,
> but IME you probably don't: Forth and C encourage different problem-
> solving styles, in particular the way that programs are factored, so
> the solutions aren't going to be the same.  It's hard to define this
> in a precise way, but IMO there is such a thing as Forthly design.

One key aspect of why Forth programs are often much smaller than programs in 
other languages trying to solve a similar problem is the "redefine the 
problem" approach. The problem in many IT projects is not very well-defined, 
and therefore, people tend to build in a lot of what Brooks calls 
"accidental complexity" into their products. Different languages stipulate 
different ways to deal with complexity.

Java programmers tend to write adapter classes to proxy factories, or any 
other combination of "design pattern" they have learned. Abstractions are 
seen as a value of their own, so they are build in the midth of free air.  
The programs are somewhat maintainable, but large and slow.  The real work 
is often delegated to a C++ native function.  Each layer of abstraction adds 
bugs to the system.

Fortran programmers (and you can write Fortran programs in any language) 
tend to write long linear stuff that does one thing after the other, 
everything broken down to the primitives of the language.  The programs are 
unmaintainable, large, but usually quite fast.  The real work is delegated 
to a library written 40 years ago.  Each change adds bugs to the system, 
which means the whole program is very fragile.

One should mention that every programmer spends more time debugging his 
stuff than writing.  Ease of debugging and trying different approaches is a 
strength rarely found.  Forth's style is to do only what's needed, and to do 
experiments - both with the code and with the spec.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/

0
Bernd
11/17/2013 2:21:41 PM
On 11/17/13 12:17 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, optimized, compiled Forth turns out to be smaller than
>> threaded code.
>
> Hmm.  Optimized compiled Forth can be smaller than, say, 32-bit
> threaded code, but it's not smaller than all forms of threaded code,
> some of which can be extremely dense.
>

When we first developed our optimizing compilers for SwiftX we were 
shocked to find that even on platforms such as the 8051 things turned 
out to be not much bigger and even sometimes smaller. One reason is that 
some things just go away: a multi-cell NEXT replaced by a simple RET, 
for example; no code field; things like that. Obviously some 
microcontrollers fare better than others.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
0
Elizabeth
11/17/2013 6:55:02 PM
hmmm

see I would like to use forth do do things we have seen with far less code and effort
0
gavino_himself
11/17/2013 9:55:43 PM
awe some!!!

why has this not yet happened?????
0
gavino_himself
11/17/2013 10:11:18 PM
Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
> On 11/17/13 12:17 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, optimized, compiled Forth turns out to be smaller than
>>> threaded code.
>>
>> Hmm.  Optimized compiled Forth can be smaller than, say, 32-bit
>> threaded code, but it's not smaller than all forms of threaded code,
>> some of which can be extremely dense.
> 
> When we first developed our optimizing compilers for SwiftX we were 
> shocked to find that even on platforms such as the 8051 things turned 
> out to be not much bigger and even sometimes smaller. One reason is that 
> some things just go away: a multi-cell NEXT replaced by a simple RET, 
> for example; no code field; things like that. Obviously some 
> microcontrollers fare better than others.

I accept that, but you can do much tighter than 16-bit threaded code
on an 8051: for some space-constrained applications 8-bit
token-threading is a good choice because it doesn't much slow things
down (over,say, DTC) and saves a good deal of space.  I have
implemented this, and I think it's very hard to beat for compactness.

Andrew.
0
Andrew
11/17/2013 10:13:08 PM
at the end you simply want a web broswer

converely a fast webserver

then you have the client server model that makes the net

if forth can replace bsd ro linux and do it simpler and well then I woudl lvoe to see it and would even try and help

once the platform is in place for network and web browser let the community come up with other stuf

0
gavino_himself
11/17/2013 10:15:02 PM
once thats done how far are you from a gui with firefox? and ability to save dwonlaoded movies?
0
gavino_himself
11/17/2013 10:28:41 PM
http://www.menuetos.net/  what do you think of this?

I am not saying general purpose os

just one where you can surf web on a humble machine

and develope web apps in forth
0
gavino_himself
11/17/2013 10:34:39 PM
On 11/17/13 12:13 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
>> On 11/17/13 12:17 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> Elizabeth D. Rather <erather@forth.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually, optimized, compiled Forth turns out to be smaller than
>>>> threaded code.
>>>
>>> Hmm.  Optimized compiled Forth can be smaller than, say, 32-bit
>>> threaded code, but it's not smaller than all forms of threaded code,
>>> some of which can be extremely dense.
>>
>> When we first developed our optimizing compilers for SwiftX we were
>> shocked to find that even on platforms such as the 8051 things turned
>> out to be not much bigger and even sometimes smaller. One reason is that
>> some things just go away: a multi-cell NEXT replaced by a simple RET,
>> for example; no code field; things like that. Obviously some
>> microcontrollers fare better than others.
>
> I accept that, but you can do much tighter than 16-bit threaded code
> on an 8051: for some space-constrained applications 8-bit
> token-threading is a good choice because it doesn't much slow things
> down (over,say, DTC) and saves a good deal of space.  I have
> implemented this, and I think it's very hard to beat for compactness.

Yes, done that, too! You're right, I was focusing on traditional ITC 
Forths, which I think is what Rod was talking about. In the 70's and 
80's we thought ITC was about the best you could do with a conventional 
implementation, and that turned out not to be the case.

Cheers,
Elizabeth

-- 
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com

"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
0
Elizabeth
11/17/2013 10:37:25 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

forth in forth
I came across this in the archives: >The widely shared belief (among both Forthies >and outsiders) that every "real" Forth programmer hacks together >his own compiler/interpreter/programming environment also makes >the Forth community look frivolous or at best naive. Most people >who program for a living know that there are more useful ways to >spend their time than building their own programming environment -- >the key to productivity is leveraging off other peoples' work. HERESY in the Forth community! Imagine... NOT coming up with your own CASE...

When did FORTH become Forth
Just curious, If I recall correctly, didn't Forth used to be FORTH? Blueeyedpop wrote: > Just curious, If I recall correctly, didn't Forth used to be FORTH? The IBM 1130 didn't do lower case. -jpd (co-developer of FORGO, a FORTRAN compile&go system for the 1130) Blueeyedpop wrote: > Just curious, If I recall correctly, didn't Forth used to be FORTH? Yes, back when we used A(or K)SR33s. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. ����������������������������������������������������������������������� When did we stop...

so there will not soon be a forth pc and forth web appserver
so web will completely be non forth? still? On Thursday, November 8, 2012 7:06:57 AM UTC-8, the_gavino_himself wrote: > so web will completely be non forth? still? Well as much as I personally would love to see a Forth OS computer with a F= orth microprocessor running applications written in Forth and a Forth scrip= ting language for a Forth website sever... I'm afraid that it will be a ve= ry long time before this comes to pass. On Nov 9, 6:26=A0am, Jason Damisch <jasondami...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Thursday, November 8, 2012 7:06:57 AM UTC-8, the_gavino_himself w...

no forth pc? no forth replacement for mysqL? a la www.prevayler.org? no forth appserver?
how about a forth clone of iceWM in 1% the code? On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 8:36:49 PM UTC-6, the_gavino_himself wrote: > how about a forth clone of iceWM in 1% the code? Right now, what I'm interested in is niche RPGMaker-type games on Android. I've done some of this work already in Java, including creating a map editor (on Android) and a playable demo, using First Seed Material (http://www.tekepon.net/fsm/index.php) assets I gave up on my last alternatives to Java when I found Terminal IDE, which allowed me to move code all the way from Java source to installable ...

arm vs forth chip, this guy saying 500 ARM chip at 1ghz same consumed as 1 i7, can any forth chip do better? serve desktop or web apps on a desktop will less pwoer? or as db server?
http://forums.macnn.com/t/411138/arm-as-a-desktop-processor On Thursday, July 26, 2012 2:39:17 AM UTC-7, (unknown) wrote: > http://forums.macnn.com/t/411138/arm-as-a-desktop-processor 500 chips consume power of 1 i7 On 7/26/2012 5:42 AM, visploveslisp@gmail.com wrote: > On Thursday, July 26, 2012 2:39:17 AM UTC-7, (unknown) wrote: >> http://forums.macnn.com/t/411138/arm-as-a-desktop-processor > > 500 chips consume power of 1 i7 I'm pretty sure that is nonsense. There are tiny ARMs intended for embedded use that use <100 mW running full out. But ARMs ...

http://www.raspberrypi.org/ why does forth not yet have a web browser os on a forth pc?
http://www.raspberrypi.org/ this does linux and supposedly sub $100 pc forth has potential but people want low cost web browser station! ...

Forth is written in Forth and it boots ur PC
Forth is written in Forth Forth must boot Forth ... My stuff is called ForthRite , if no U.C. i'll have to read it as forthrite , certainly a new English verb meaning proper and unarguebale .... !! Same thing , my stuff is proper and unargueable .... Forthrite shell is the first 400 bytes in an ARM 128KB NOR-Flash boot ROM . It I/O's to RS232c serial port , but also on same wires is a 4 by 4 keypad to send breaks to RS232c .. It can create permanent code in its tiny dictionary located in SRAM . If the normal boot process is successful , there s no ...

applications in forth or forth libraries
is there a archive of applications built in forth? something like cpan for perl? etc.? On Dec 2, 3:46=A0pm, gavino <gavcom...@gmail.com> wrote: > is there a archive of applications built in forth? > > something like cpan for perl? etc.? Well, you'll find some things. Take a look at forthfreak.net to get the pointers. The main problem is that even "ANS compatible" Forths are not compatible at all if you add the mindset of the programmer to the standard. There are some classes of problems that are better solved by non-ANS extensions than with ANS. And almost every...

Forth is to program , Forth is NOT to study ..
Forth is to program , not to learn , nor study . Study is for students , Students dont eat well . They seek help and subsidy , and credencials .. all , far from productive programming . There is NO arguement , NO arguement in Forth , cause it is always done LEAST WORK , FASTEST runtime . In 40 years , Humans have built up school systems , universities, industries and factories Since it is a "system" , its uncompetitive . Competition and profits are impossible from any system . Accountants can see the "books" indicate this is ...

so about forth and the web, is it crazy to make websites outa forth?
I mean is forth for like mebedded things? Or is itcompletely cool to learn it and use it to whip up nice websites? gavino wrote: > I mean is forth for like mebedded things? > > Or is itcompletely cool to learn it and use it to whip up nice websites? If you're using somebody else's server, and they're all hot on security and control and not letting you crash their system and all, they may not run a Forth for you or let you run one. So then you're out of luck using Forth, unless you use it to create HTML pages or something on your own system and upload the completed...

No more a Forth web page : http://forth.org.uk/ ?
Is http://forth.org.uk/ still a link to a Forth page ? Charles Charles Melice wrote: > Is http://forth.org.uk/ still a link to a Forth page ? > > Charles I'll ask on the Fig-UK mailing list. I followed the link but there seems to be an auto-direct to a blank page (blank.html). It may be that the site is being updated at present. -- ******************************************************************** Paul E. Bennett ....................<email://peb@amleth.demon.co.uk> Forth based HIDECS Consultancy .....<http://www.amleth.demon.co.uk/> Mob: +44 (0)7811-6399...

Forth in a Keyboard (Was Re: I was thinking about a Forth chip market ...)
Several years ago I saw an Amiga 500 (?), which a realtor was using as his desktop system. Everything (processor, memory, video and a floppy drive) was built into the keyboard. I know that it was just the latest in a long line of such systems (i.e. Atari, Apple, Commodore), but still very cool: A multi-tasking, 32-bit system which fit into a keyboard. I've read Jeff's comments current and past about the bloat surrounding most modern apps and the wonderful things that he and the folks at iTV were able to do with Forth chips and code. So, I'm wondering if we could come up with a...

FORTH
Has anyone got an implementation working on a TREO 600? Ian implementation of what On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 18:44:49 +0000 (UTC), "Ian Jones" <bellevueparkw@btinternet.com> wrote: |Has anyone got an implementation working on a TREO 600? | |Ian | Alien at Large wrote: > On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 18:44:49 +0000 (UTC), "Ian Jones" > <bellevueparkw@btinternet.com> wrote: > > |Has anyone got an implementation working on a TREO 600? > | > |Ian > > implementation of what What he said in the subject line. (Hint: it&#...

Forth
Was there ever a forth on cart for the 8 bitters? And if so, anyone got one they dont want anymore... On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:16:43 +0000, Ziggy wrote: > Was there ever a forth on cart for the 8 bitters? Not that I'm aware of. If there is one, I would be interested on Infos. There are a couple of disk based forth systems for the Atari 8bit, see http://www.strotmann.de/twiki/bin/view/APG/LangForth > > And if so, anyone got one they dont want anymore... I can build you one, if you like (8 KB Cart, or AtariMax Flashcart), if you need one for work, not for colle...

Web resources about - Id love to surf web with 4megs ram forth pc using forth and forth chips - comp.lang.forth

Pushing Flash Video to the max
A recent post on Jeff Pulver’s blog and my own recent review of the DivX web video system got me thinking again about the future of video delivery ...

Axis Dolly :: Videos
... (wmv, 0.9Meg) Axis Dolly Body - Arc (wmv, 0.7Meg) Axis Dolly Body - Linear (wmv, 0.3Meg) Axis Dolly with Tripod - Rotate (wmv, 0.4Meg) Caster ...

4megGS « Briel Computers
... us Store Forums Retro computer Kits VCF East Workshop search skip to content ↓ Home Downloads Events VCF East 9.1 Forums News Products 4megGS ...

39% off at Allbobbleheads.com
Why You Should Go:&amp;#160;The last time you crafted a mini sculpture of yourself, it involved an unreasonable amount of clay and a high school ...

Music
Do you like rock n' roll? Then listen to something different for a change, something that you haven'theard before. Something that hasn't been ...

Over Easy: Old School
... box cameras , you really have to know how to use it and what it can and cannot do. Or those big old slow mainframe computers with all of 4meg ...

portables - media archaeology lab
... Apple Computer Model: M5120 Year: 1989-1991 Original Price: $7300 Serial: Model Number: M5120; FCC ID: BCGM5120 Floppy Drive: Internal 1.4Meg ...


RELATION DE LA BATAILLE DE MARENGO, GAGNÉE LE 25 PRAIRIAL AN 8.
... 1800. 17"x9"; b&w; 1:1500000; jpeg; 400dpi; 2.9meg Map 1 of the Battle of Marengo, 14 June 1800. 17"x9"; b&w; 1:50000; jpeg; 400dpi; 2.4meg ...

Snowshoe Documentaries: for social and economic justice
ZELIKOW, - part 1 Philip Zelikow, 9/11 insider, is scheduled to speak at Chautauqua Institution on August 9, 2007 (western New York, near Jamestown). ...

Resources last updated: 2/3/2016 11:32:22 AM