Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a difference between "x is not negative" and "x is positive" (¬(x 0)). Why shouldn't a similar subtlety (or a larger one) exist in prosaic language?
Why not just say "x is zero"?
1 is also not negative.
Collapse OS – Why Forth?
161–170 of 172 posts
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#162If the author wants their code to survive the apocalypse, they should generate Turing Machines that have a simple shim interpreter for low-power architectures. The benefit of this is you can build an interpreter for a TM in wood or other simple materials. Semi-Thue systems also fit.
I don't get why this is downvoted.
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#163If the author wants their code to survive the apocalypse, they should generate Turing Machines that have a simple shim interpreter for low-power architectures. The benefit of this is you can build an interpreter for a TM in wood or other simple materials. Semi-Thue systems also fit.
I don't get why this is downvoted.
Me neither. I like it but the limiting factor on post-apocalyptic digital electronics will be access to datasheets, eh?
It would be interesting to build a minimal useful CPU out of fluidics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluidics
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#164Forth is Lisp, but with composition as the basic operator instead of application. The result, of course, is a wildly different language but one which inspired the same degree of fanaticism among its adherents in their search for simplicity and elegance. A truly under appreciated language imho.
I rather disagree with your first sentence. Forth is not Lisp, nor is Prolog or APL Lisp, and none of these languages are one short conceptual leap away from the others. Even a very rudimentary Forth can express concepts which have only hazy correspondences in a Lisp, like words which twiddle the return stack or yield a variable number of results on the parameter stack. I find it misleading at best to casually intima…
This article talks about “linear lisp” with a stack and you basically end up with something forth-like. http://home.pipeline.com/~hbaker1/ForthStack.html Linear Logic and Permutation Stacks--The Forth Shall Be First
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get why this is downvoted.
Me neither. I like it but the limiting factor on post-apocalyptic digital electronics will be access to datasheets, eh? It would be interesting to build a minimal useful CPU out of fluidics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluidics
Definitely. Or mechanical logic gates. But the surface area would very quickly become an issue for such a project, and you'd need to assume only a certain few tools.
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not just say "x is zero"?
1 is also not negative.
Yes, and 2 is not negative, and 3 is not negative, and 4 is not negative, etc.
That is the point. This style of communication is indirect and ambiguous. This is just negative followed by negative followed by negative, etc.
Just say what you mean. In the affirmative. Overuse of negatives is the functional equivalent of "spaghetti code" in written communication. Not easy to follow.
Anyway, some readers missed the point of the comment. It is not every day that one sees so many negatives in one sentence. Most however got the point, and the commenter who crafted a version of the sentence with even more negatives I thought was hilarious.
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've read that page and I'm still wondering why they're using FORTH. C has excellent portability and performance. The article agrees with the general consensus that C is also generally a better language for the programmer. So why use FORTH? What does it matter that it can do cute things with self-hosting? What does 'compactness' matter? If the goal is to build a portable means of writing programs for Z80 and AVR, why…
> What does 'compactness' matter? Because after the end of civilization, you may be inputting your first programs on punch cards or something similar, and your system's memory capacity might be measured in a few kilobytes, not gigabytes. Compactness is a huge deal in this context.
Having spent a couple of hours as a kid typing in a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpeedScript binary printed in a magazine, one byte at a time, I can confirm that compactness is valuable.
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're not terrified at the Western response to the Coronavirus, you're not paying attention. The low systemic risk events we are living through now, prove that the Emperor is naked. An event that produces moderate to serious systemic shocks would be our DOOM.
Regardless of how insufficient the response was, it was still far swifter and more effective than the response to the Spanish Flu. Also, the knock-on effects will influence significant changes for years come. We learn slowly, but we learn.
Who is we? The divided population that’s ready to ignite? The corporations that are ruining the planet? The politicians that are as effective as puppets? The billionaires that are stocking their bunker mansions? The onepercenters that are doing the same (minus extravagant luxury)?
The system is on a hairline trigger and the control room is empty.
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
Me neither. I like it but the limiting factor on post-apocalyptic digital electronics will be access to datasheets, eh? It would be interesting to build a minimal useful CPU out of fluidics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluidics
Definitely. Or mechanical logic gates. But the surface area would very quickly become an issue for such a project, and you'd need to assume only a certain few tools.
True. I wonder what kind of computations people would need to do that would make it worthwhile to make big, slow computers?
I bet it would be easier to make up "sacred dances" that incorporated processing in the motions of the dancers.
And let's not forget that a human with an abacus can do a great deal of the math required for everyday life. :-)
Re: Collapse OS – Why Forth?
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh wow, thanks. That is pretty much exactly what I was looking for.
Original repository and introductory article: http://git.annexia.org/?p=jonesforth.git;a=shortlog https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2010/08/07/jonesforth-git-reposit...
For anyone stumbling over this and having trouble to build it, I had to figure out two things:
1. When building on x86_64 Debian, I had to install linux-libc-dev:i386 to get /usr/include/i386-linux-gnu/asm/unistd.h. I also had to adapt the include path to have it actually found.
2. If you see a segfault when running the executable, you likely need to remove -Wl,-Ttext,0 from the build command. At least on my system, it fixes the segfaults and now jonesforth runs as expected.