years worth of bug
fixes to address before reworking the engine.
Paul Looney
-Original Message-
From: J. Landman Gay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Sent: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 23:38:59 -0500
Subject: Re: FORTH and Hypercard
Stephen Barncard wrote
Bill-
Sunday, October 16, 2005, 10:46:25 PM, you wrote:
Ah Neon. It was the first language I bought for the Mac. It was object
oriented and everything.
IIRC Neon was where Michael Hore started when he built Mops and really
took the whole object-oriented thing to a new level.
--
-Mark Wieder
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jacque,
I wonder if Scott would come to the same conclusion today.
On modern computers messages can transverse the entire path in
nanoseconds.
True, though knowing Scott Raney he wouldn't change it even now.
However, the reason I changed my mind about the
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Sent: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:35:14 -0500
Subject: Re: FORTH and Hypercard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jacque,
I wonder if Scott would come to the same conclusion today.
On modern computers messages can transverse the entire path in
nanoseconds.
True, though
J. Landman Gay wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jacque,
I wonder if Scott would come to the same conclusion today.
On modern computers messages can transverse the entire path in
nanoseconds.
True, though knowing Scott Raney he wouldn't change it even now.
However, the reason I changed my
Richard-
Monday, October 17, 2005, 2:37:20 PM, you wrote:
Yeah, I got all up in Scott's face over that once, insisting it was
absolutely necessary to support. He asked me for a test case where no
alternative was available to accomplish a given goal, and darnit I never
did come up with one.
Jacque-
Monday, October 17, 2005, 10:35:14 AM, you wrote:
True, though knowing Scott Raney he wouldn't change it even now.
There shouldn't really be much of a speed difference - the way this is
usually handled is you create a hash table with the overloaded
functions. If there's a match in the
Mark Wieder wrote:
Jacque-
Monday, October 17, 2005, 10:35:14 AM, you wrote:
True, though knowing Scott Raney he wouldn't change it even now.
There shouldn't really be much of a speed difference - the way this is
usually handled is you create a hash table with the overloaded
functions. If
Mark,
One of the great things about Forth was the overhead of just a few
machine language instructions to execute a high level function call.
Transcript seems to require a trip around the world to jump next
door. For GUI speed stuff, it would not be a problem, but for my
array
In 1980 I worked with Kenny Jones (now at Digital Domain) at a place
called New World Pictures. We worked on a machine called the Elicon,
a camera control robot that was programmed in FORTH, and made movie
special effects for Roger Corman and others.
It was a beautiful piece of work - dc
Stephen-
Sunday, October 16, 2005, 6:47:15 PM, you wrote:
I also liked a feature of Hypercard that was like forth - you could
redefine and intercept a lower level handler using the same name. I
guess it was a design decision to not allow that in Transcript
but why?
Yes, that's the
Dennis-
Sunday, October 16, 2005, 6:27:04 PM, you wrote:
One of the great things about Forth was the overhead of just a few
machine language instructions to execute a high level function call.
Yep - it's hard to beat an indirect stack pop for speed.
Transcript seems to require a trip around
On Oct 16, 2005, at 6:47 PM, Stephen Barncard wrote:
I also liked a feature of Hypercard that was like forth - you could
redefine and intercept a lower level handler using the same name. I
guess it was a design decision to not allow that in Transcript
but why?
I believe it's
On Oct 17, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Well, the Forth kernel doesn't take up much space - there are a few
implementations in C available - it might be fun to throw one of the
embedded forths into an external library, but I expect you could count
the interested target group on one
Stephen Barncard wrote:
I also liked a feature of Hypercard that was like forth - you could
redefine and intercept a lower level handler using the same name. I
guess it was a design decision to not allow that in Transcript but why?
Speed. Raney wouldn't put it in, and now that I'm used
that's possible! but forth wasn't in mind though I did try long ago
a forth language on my first mac named Neon... If anyone remembers it!
cheers
Xavier
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Mark Wieder
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005
Ah Neon. It was the first language I bought for the Mac. It was object
oriented and everything.
I never could get the hang of it though - just awful. Too bad. I always
wanted to say. I program in neon.
Bill
On Oct 16, 2005, at 9:58 PM, MisterX wrote:
that's possible! but forth wasn't in
17 matches
Mail list logo
