Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: Bruce McFarling <agila61@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:01:25 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 10, 7:10 pm, John Doty <j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Excellent! A constructive response! What prevented this from emerging in
the past? How can we create such a thing?
A library oversight system that is used in common by a core collection
of wordsets ... libraries, servers, and applications alike ...
developed so that users of a range (not every, maybe not even a large
number, but a range) of implementations can simply load and run the
code that they download.
Initial target systems I think would be gforth, WIn32Forth, FPC,
hForth and eForth (v3 model).
A version/revision system built into the wordlist management system,
in support of a versioning system.
Libraries: FSL, TOOLBELT, shuttlepad string handling (don't ask and I
won't tell), script language engine, dynamic memory buffer allocation
spanning ALLOCATE and BLOCKS.
Servers: ThePanel text-driven fullscreen interactive user interface
for text oriented applications, from simple FACILITY through to a rich
text window within a GUI environment.
Applications: a text-file editor with useful macro handling, a data-
file editor with computed data column extensions, a small rich text
mark-up, fold-able literate programming system with back-ends for html
rich text, xhtml rich text, BBCode rich text, LaTex, and rtf, a netcat-
based text oriented web browser ... etc.
So, that's five miles to walk and I've gone 20 feet. I better get a
bicycle.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: gavino
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: John Doty
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: Guy Macon
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: John Doty
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: Guy Macon
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: John Doty
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: Guy Macon
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: John Doty
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: Guy Macon
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: John Doty
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: Andrew Haley
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: John Doty
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: Bruce McFarling
- Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- From: John Doty
- part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- Prev by Date: Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- Next by Date: Re: INLINE
- Previous by thread: Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- Next by thread: Re: part 21 asserts forth best for small memory systems, would lisp be better in non small mem?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
