 | | Re: TpForth Project ?
|
|
(...) compiling (...) to (...) Following Harald's suggestion yesterday I downloaded the (big) TPForth Developer Studio. My very first impression is it would be a very cool tool to use together with pbForth. In the comments field of the downloading (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
(...) I realized this later, and felt it would be even more confusing to clear it up! Mea Culpa again! (...) Great. I've been struggling with getting info for the FAQ together that makes it easy for all platforms to use pbForth. The goofy line-end (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
In response to a message by Ben Jackson, Ralph Hempel wrote: <snip> (...) Actually Ralph, I think that was me. :) Although there are a few things *I've* said about pbforth that I don't like, you've given your reasons for the choices you've made to a (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | TpForth Project ?
|
|
Ralph, You might want to check out the TPForth Developer Studio, a cross compiling Forth system for embedded apps. Seems to have a nice IDE (though not in Forth) that should be quickly adaptable to support pbForth. And it's free to non-commercial (...) (25 years ago, 10-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
Ben Jackson wrote.. (...) And Mark Terrabain replied... (...) I'm reluctant to take pbForth there because the RCX already compiles bytecodes and SAVE-SYSTEM sends them back to the host in Srecord format. Writing and testing a bytecode compiler for (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
Ben, Thanks for emailing and feeding back some important issues for the rest of the Mindstorms pbForth community. I'll always welcome comments and respond as quickly as possible... Let me address each point, sorry about the quoting, but it's needed (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
Well, I can rather agree on the uploading, but I don't find it quite as bad as you do. Not as good as NQC, but then NQC still has all the LEGO firmware limitations. As for the rest of your comments, I can only say that I managed to get the (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
(...) This, IMO, is the biggest problem with pbForth as it exists. Although I have no idea why, Ralph seems reluctant to take pbForth to that point at this time. (And it makes even less sense to me when I think about the idea that most of this (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
So I've just been crawling over some broken glass, ERR, I mean, uploading pbFORTH text files to the RCX! It's hard to tell the difference! At the least, pbFORTH needs to: 1) accept \n, \r, \n\r or \r\n all as it does a single \r now. 2) have a mode (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Thought on pbForth
|
|
(...) Neither am I... but the fact is that it's not 20 years ago. My attitude is why use computers as if we are? (btw, I was programming back then... and I must confess that there are a few things I miss about programming in that era [most notably, (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
