Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Bart Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 12:31:10 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 61 Message-ID: References: <87v7zjuyd8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240829084851.962@kylheku.com> <87mskvuxe9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2024 13:31:11 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f78fc89e66291041ea37870e95b59fc2"; logging-data="2526002"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18kyJFP2o0G2VaZdSOOtFnV" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:jxWA7qbMGl/ta+cjcbLPKlt2CXY= Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: Bytes: 4036 On 09/09/2024 02:19, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > Bart wrote: >> On 08/09/2024 19:13, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>> Bart wrote: >>>> On 08/09/2024 01:05, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>>>> Bart wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Then you no longer have a language which can be implemented in a few KB. >>>>>> You might as well use a real with with proper data types, and not have >>>>>> the stack exposed in the language. Forth code can be very cryptic >>>>>> because of that. >>>>> >>>>> First, it is not my goal to advocate for Forth use. >>>> >>>> You're doing a fine job of it! >>>> >>>> For me it's one of those languages, like Brainf*ck, which is trivial to >>>> implement (I've done both), but next to impossible to code in. >>> >>> I wonder if you really implemented Forth. Did you implement immediate >>> words? POSTPONE? >> >> I implemented a toy version, with 35 predefined words, that was enough >> to implement Fizz Buzz. Then I looked for more examples to try and found >> they all assumed slightly different sets of built-ins. > > OK, so apparently you missed essential part. I've looked at half a dozen hits for 'forth postpone' and I still don't understand what it does. Apparently something to do with compiled mode. I wouldn't know enough to confidently implement it or use it. Another mysterious feature with hard to understand semantics. You did say this was a very simple language and trivial to implement in a few KB? My opinion of Forth has gone down a couple of notches; sorry. (I'm not against all stack-based user-languages; I was quite impressed by PostScript for example. But then I didn't have to do much in-depth coding in it.) >> On ZX81? I can imagine it being hard! (Someone wanted me to do something >> on ZX80, but I turned it down. I considered it too much of a toy.) > > To give more background, bare ZX81 had 1kB RAM (including video RAM). You must mean /excluding/ surely? Otherwise there wouldn't be much left from 1KB! The first Z80 machine I /made/ had 0.25KB RAM, to which I added 1KB (actually 1K 6-bit words; two bits unpopulated to save £6), of text-mode video memory. The second version had 32KB RAM, the same 1K text-mode memory, and 8KB graphics-mode video memory. I was able to write my first compiler on that one, written using an assembler, which itself was written via a hex editor, and that was written in actual binary. ('Full-stack') But both only had tape storage so tools were memory-based.