On Thursday, 7 October 2021 at 16:19:25 UTC+1, chuck...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 1:47:00 AM UTC-5, jpit...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 07:38:04 UTC+1, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> > > Rolf Hemmerling posted this in different Forth facebook groups:
> > > https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH
> > >
> > > Forth2020
> > > orSepgtateumbemgri 28 oat 2:or52e PugdM ·
> > > 🥳Great news for our next Zoom meeting October 9. ! WOW ! Please share with more Forth friends on different channels. We will have the great presentations and super interesting themes as ever. Join &participate ->https://www.facebook.com/groups/forth2020
> > >
> > > It is scheduled that my Forth2020 Facebook group will have a zoom meeting with "Chuck", what an honor!
> > > Oh sorry folks, not "Chuck Norris", but "Charles (Chuck) Moore", the creator of the Forth programming language, 50 years ago 🙂
> > > https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=170644201881192&id=100123365599943
> > Just saw a 40 years remebrance of an AMSAT satellite project.
> > https://www.sstl.co.uk/media-hub/latest-news/2021/the-story-of-uosat-1-ingenuity-teamwork-and-lots-o
> >
> > Using most probably IPS - a Forth-like Language.
> > running on the 1802 ( as stated there)
> > For details about IPS see the book Dr. Meinzer wrote
> > https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07SGWCSKT/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i16
> > or search the internet for most of the documentation.
> >
> > Chuck may have been invlved there in some way.
> > At least one could ask Chuck
> > if he knows about what was happening there and then..
> Will this be recorded and made available via some other method than Facebook?
>
> I don't do FB, but would enjoy watching (or, at least, listening to) this..
> Thanks

It seems that the recordings end up on youtube - see example I looked at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fC-nJANuhAw

On Monday, October 4, 2021 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-7, jpit...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, 3 October 2021 at 20:46:46 UTC+1, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> > On Sunday, October 3, 2021 at 11:58:28 AM UTC-7, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> > > The MiniForth had a 16-bit stack and no floating point.
> > > The MiniForth didn't even have an instruction for doing a 16-bit integer addition.
> > > Addition was done with a lengthy primitive that used 4-bit half-adders and XOR;
> > > this was they only general-purpose primitive that I didn't write (because I didn't
> > > understand addition very well, although I could have figured it out given more time).
> > I should also mention that none of the instructions had an operand.
> > The only addressing mode available was inherent.
> > Also, the only way to change the PC was with the NXT instruction; there were no jumps.
> > That makes the programmer's life difficult!
> > There are only three programmers who program in MFX assembly-language
> > which are myself (and I wrote the assembler), John Hart and Steve Brault.
> > I was well aware at the time that nobody else would ever learn MFX assembly
> > because it is too difficult --- MFX assembly-language is really mind-blowing
> > for your average programmer accustomed to the x86 or MC68K or whatever.
> > This is despite the fact that I made the assembly-language as easy as possible,
> > in that the assembler did the out-of-ordering of the instructions internally and
> > the programmer could just write his assembly-language source-code as if
> > the instructions were executed sequentially in the same order that they
> > appeared in the source-code (in truth, up to five instructions could execute
> > concurrently in a single clock cycle).
> >
> > God himself would likely shit his pants trying to learn MFX assembly-language.
> well, as Einstein said:
>
> Albert Einstein Quotes
> If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.

I think that when an employee takes a job doing a task that the boss doesn't know how
to do, this will end badly for the employee. The truth is that John Hart didn't know how
to write an assembler for the MiniForth --- the advice he gave me was uniformly bad
and I ignored his advice completely --- the out-of-ordering was my own idea and design.
Testra won't admit this now. Tom Hart says that MFX was written long before
I showed up and I had nothing to do with it.
We have this Zoom meeting with Charles Moore (notice that I don't call him 'Chuck
as if we are best buddies'). Somebody please ask him this question:
"Have you ever hired a programmer to do a task that you didn't know how to do,
and you just hoped that the employee would figure something out?"

Most likely, his answer would be:
"I can write any program that I may need! If I hire a programmer it would just be
a code-monkey who follows my design and my directions, and/or a maintenance
programmer who needs me to design the program and write 90% of the code
so he can then write some simple scripts on top of it. I"m a genius!
The Forth community is composed entirely of wanna-bees desperately trying to
imitate me and/or steal my code --- they have no purpose except to be
Forth Inc. customers and financially support my ex-girlfriend."

Of course, Jeff Fox would disagree with this description of him being a code monkey
and a maintenance programmer --- he is dead now though, so he can't complain.

On Wednesday, October 6, 2021 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
> On 07/10/2021 6:07, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>
> > I wrote MFX entirely by myself, and the design was entirely my own.
> > I invented the algorithm for out-of-ordering the instructions to pack them into
> > the opcodes with a minimum number of NOP instructions while still guaranteeing
> > that the user's program did the same thing as it would have done if the
> > instructions had been assembled sequentially one-per-opcode in the same
> > order that they appeared in the user's source-code --- I did everything in MFX
> > except write the function to do 16-bit addition, which was done by Steve Brault,
> > but I don't think that excludes me from claiming MFX to be my software.
> Bravo, Hugh! That was doubtless a major achievement. But why in hell do
> you keep reiterating the stories of your glory days with MFX?
>
> It would be like me continually retelling how back in the day I wrote a
> TSR program for a (then) major SW company, entirely in 8086
> assembly-language, by myself, and invented several cool techniques.
>
> Nobody cares any more, that's ancient history. What have you done *lately*?

Ron Aaron is showing his level of incompetence!

1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
(terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was invented by
MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.

2.) 8086 assembly-language is easy. This is a CISC processor with multiple
addressing-modes that even do addition internally. There are a lot of registers
(by the standards of the 1980s, although modern processors have more registers).
There are multiple conditional jumps that can be used for control-flow.
8086 assembly-language is as easy to program in as a high-level language,
and is arguably easier than C. There are multiple books available on 8086 assembly
language and any advanced-level high-school student is expected to know this.

There are no books on VLIW processors. Since 1994, the only person that I have met
who is familiar with the concept is Ilya Tarasov (he has never implemented a VLIW
processor though, nor has he written an assembler for one). Many Verilog and/or VHDL
programmers have looked at my TOYF design (available for download here:
https://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=21841). All of them have said:
"This would be easy to implement on an FPGA! But, tell me first, what order are the
A, B, and M fields executed in --- that is all I need to know to get started!"
I explain that these fields execute concurrently --- this blows their minds --- I never
hear from them again.
It was mind-blowing for me too, back in 1994 --- I struggled with this concept,
but eventually grokked it --- I can figure out totally new and alien concepts.

C.L.F. is full of fake experts.
Here is an example of somebody trying to educate me on what a Harvard Architecture
processor is: https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.forth/c/MXFGBjt-UIg

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 4:48:15 AM UTC-7, the.bee...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 6:36:13 AM UTC+2, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 9:40:57 AM UTC-7, the.bee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > 4tH's got about a hundred opcodes using a Harvard architecture.
> > You don't know what Harvard Architecture is!
> >
> > This is a kind of processor in which the code-memory and data-memory each have
> > their own address and data bus --- it is possible to access both code-memory and
> > data-memory concurrently.
> You can make up all the definitions you want, Hugh, but I'm going for this one:
> "The Harvard architecture is a computer architecture with separate storage and signal pathways
> for instructions and data. It contrasts with the von Neumann architecture, where program instructions
> and data share the same memory and pathways. In a Harvard architecture, there is no need
> to make the two memories share characteristics. In particular, the word width, timing,
> implementation technology, and memory address structure can differ".
>
> Which is exactly what the segments in 4tH do. The Code Segment is R/O and contains opcodes
> and operands. The String Segment is R/O - and there are even NO opcode to access it directly.
> The Integer Segment contains cells, the Character Segment contains chars.
> All opcodes are bound to operate on their distinct segments. All addresses are for a specific segment.

On 8/10/2021 11:25, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>
> Testra won't admit this now. Tom Hart says that MFX was written long before
> I showed up and I had nothing to do with it.

Not in any posted statements from them here. But if that's the line
you're pushing, you can't exactly complain when Jurgen agrees with it.
You can't seem to decide whether you're a victim or a genius. You
certainly can't be both.

On 2021-10-08, Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, October 4, 2021 at 3:33:51 AM UTC-7, jpit...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, 3 October 2021 at 20:46:46 UTC+1, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>> > On Sunday, October 3, 2021 at 11:58:28 AM UTC-7, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>> > > The MiniForth had a 16-bit stack and no floating point.
>> > > The MiniForth didn't even have an instruction for doing a 16-bit integer addition.
>> > > Addition was done with a lengthy primitive that used 4-bit half-adders and XOR;
>> > > this was they only general-purpose primitive that I didn't write (because I didn't
>> > > understand addition very well, although I could have figured it out given more time).
>> > I should also mention that none of the instructions had an operand.
>> > The only addressing mode available was inherent.
>> > Also, the only way to change the PC was with the NXT instruction; there were no jumps.
>> > That makes the programmer's life difficult!
>> > There are only three programmers who program in MFX assembly-language
>> > which are myself (and I wrote the assembler), John Hart and Steve Brault.
>> > I was well aware at the time that nobody else would ever learn MFX assembly
>> > because it is too difficult --- MFX assembly-language is really mind-blowing
>> > for your average programmer accustomed to the x86 or MC68K or whatever.
>> > This is despite the fact that I made the assembly-language as easy as possible,
>> > in that the assembler did the out-of-ordering of the instructions internally and
>> > the programmer could just write his assembly-language source-code as if
>> > the instructions were executed sequentially in the same order that they
>> > appeared in the source-code (in truth, up to five instructions could execute
>> > concurrently in a single clock cycle).
>> >
>> > God himself would likely shit his pants trying to learn MFX assembly-language.
>> well, as Einstein said:
>>
>> Albert Einstein Quotes
>> If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
>
> I think that when an employee takes a job doing a task that the boss doesn't know how
> to do, this will end badly for the employee. The truth is that John Hart didn't know how
> to write an assembler for the MiniForth --- the advice he gave me was uniformly bad
> and I ignored his advice completely --- the out-of-ordering was my own idea and design.
> Testra won't admit this now. Tom Hart says that MFX was written long before
> I showed up and I had nothing to do with it.
>
When you work for money, you don't think, you just do. No questions asked.
With your attitude you will not be welcomed anywhere, as compromising
coworkers is something which is not welcome..
Actually, sometimes, you have to do it, if others compromise you, to defend
yourself...

--

7-77-777
Evil Sinner!
with software, you repeat same experiment, expecting different results...

On 08/10/2021 3:44, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 6, 2021 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:

>> It would be like me continually retelling how back in the day I wrote a
>> TSR program for a (then) major SW company, entirely in 8086
>> assembly-language, by myself, and invented several cool techniques.
>>
>> Nobody cares any more, that's ancient history. What have you done *lately*?
>
> Ron Aaron is showing his level of incompetence!

OK, Karen.

> 1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
> (terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was invented by
> MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
> Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.

I didn't say I invented TSR programs, you absolute spoon.

You need to develop some reading comprehension skills (among many other
things).

The techniques I developed were cool IMO and in the opinions of my
coworkers and employer at the time. One of the programs I wrote was
bought out by Intel. That mattered to me then; now, it's dinosaur bones
and nobody cares, which is what my point was, you utter disgrace.

On 8/10/2021 16:35, Ron AARON wrote:
>
>
> On 08/10/2021 3:44, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 6, 2021 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
>
>>> It would be like me continually retelling how back in the day I wrote a
>>> TSR program for a (then) major SW company, entirely in 8086
>>> assembly-language, by myself, and invented several cool techniques.
>>>
>>> Nobody cares any more, that's ancient history. What have you done *lately*?
>>
>> Ron Aaron is showing his level of incompetence!
>
> OK, Karen.
>
>> 1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
>> (terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was invented by
>> MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
>> Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.
>
> I didn't say I invented TSR programs, you absolute spoon.
>
> You need to develop some reading comprehension skills (among many other
> things).
>
> The techniques I developed were cool IMO and in the opinions of my
> coworkers and employer at the time. One of the programs I wrote was
> bought out by Intel. That mattered to me then; now, it's dinosaur bones
> and nobody cares, which is what my point was, you utter disgrace.
>

If 8th goes belly-up you may need those bones if only as a tale of success
to tell your grand children. Hugh OTOH is well-placed to write his memoir
- 'Trials and Tribulations of an Unappreciated Forth Programmer' - having
gathered all the material, including c.l.f clippings he seems able to
reference at the drop of a hat.

On 08/10/2021 9:23, dxforth wrote:
> On 8/10/2021 16:35, Ron AARON wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/10/2021 3:44, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, October 6, 2021 at 9:07:43 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
>>
>>>> It would be like me continually retelling how back in the day I wrote a
>>>> TSR program for a (then) major SW company, entirely in 8086
>>>> assembly-language, by myself, and invented several cool techniques.
>>>>
>>>> Nobody cares any more, that's ancient history. What have you done
>>>> *lately*?
>>>
>>> Ron Aaron is showing his level of incompetence!
>>
>> OK, Karen.
>>
>>> 1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
>>> (terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was
>>> invented by
>>> MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
>>> Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.
>>
>> I didn't say I invented TSR programs, you absolute spoon.
>>
>> You need to develop some reading comprehension skills (among many other
>> things).
>>
>> The techniques I developed were cool IMO and in the opinions of my
>> coworkers and employer at the time. One of the programs I wrote was
>> bought out by Intel. That mattered to me then; now, it's dinosaur bones
>> and nobody cares, which is what my point was, you utter disgrace.
>>
>
> If 8th goes belly-up you may need those bones if only as a tale of success
> to tell your grand children.  Hugh OTOH is well-placed to write his memoir
> - 'Trials and Tribulations of an Unappreciated Forth Programmer' - having
> gathered all the material, including c.l.f clippings he seems able to
> reference at the drop of a hat.

Heh :)

My grandchildren are still young enough to appreciate me, but you may be
right! I can also envision being in the old-age home and boring all the
other residents with my incredible tales of technical derring-do.

I do believe Hugh has memorized every slight he ever received in the
past, and has them ready to reference immediately. I don't know his
system, maybe the FBI or the like could purchase it from him.

On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 10:35:48 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
> On 08/10/2021 3:44, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> > 1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
> > (terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was invented by
> > MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
> > Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.
> I didn't say I invented TSR programs, you absolute spoon.
>
> You need to develop some reading comprehension skills (among many other
> things).
>
> The techniques I developed were cool IMO and in the opinions of my
> coworkers and employer at the time. One of the programs I wrote was
> bought out by Intel. That mattered to me then; now, it's dinosaur bones
> and nobody cares, which is what my point was, you utter disgrace.

What technique was that?
You just bought one of the many books on TSRs and copied all of the code
out of the book --- and you bought the book with American foreign-aid money.

My point is that doing something that has never been done before will end badly.
Trying to brag about MFX never works --- invariably some code-monkey will say:
"I wrote a Forth compiler too! It was useless, but fun to write. I'm your peer!"
For example, DXforth has his Z80 Forth for CP/M that was very likely copied
out of the book: "Threaded Interpretive Languages" (R.G. Loeliger).
Now we have Ron Aaron bragging about programming in 8086 assembly-language
that he thinks is comparable to MFX assembly-language. It isn't.

This is why it is so dumb that Tom Hart wants all of the glory of MFX
for Testra, and none for me --- he refuses to admit that I wrote MFX.
There is no glory! Tom Hart and John Hart became liars, and they obtained nothing
in return --- they could have just told the truth that I wrote MFX --- all C programmers
in the world will say that Forth is retarded and Testra should have just used C,
and all Forth programmers will say that ANS-Forth is retarded so they have switched
to C, and all C/Forth programmers (such as Anton Ertl, Bernd Paysan, etc.) will brag
that they have written a Forth in C which was useless but fun to write.

MFX is something that I'm proud of.
Haters such as Tom Hart, Juergen Pintaske, Ron Aaron, etc., can't make me
feel ashamed of having written MFX --- I succeeded at what had never
been done before. BTW: I refer to the MiniForth as a VLIW processor.
John Hart never mentioned the term 'VLIW' or 'WISC' when I worked there.
If he had, I could have read up on the subject --- this is assuming that there are
books available, which there might not be (I've never researched the subject
so I wouldn't know if there are any books or not) --- I just figured it out
as I went, and only much later did I read about VLIW and WISC and think:
"That seems to be the same thing that I was doing at Testra."
So I'm a big expert on a subject that almost nobody else has read about,
and I haven't read anything on the subject either --- this isn't something
that can be put on a resume --- plus, Testra doesn't give me a job reference,
so I can't have a resume listing Testra anyway (I never applied for work as
a programmer again after I found out that Testra wasn't giving me a reference).

VLIW is dead now --- that was 1990s technology --- it is not competitive now.
Charles Moore most likely had a similar experience.
His RTX2000 was very expensive, and it had only about the same level
of performance as the MC68K --- the MiniForth based on the Lattice
isp1048 PLD was less expensive than the MC68K with higher performance.
The RTX2000 didn't get used for any useful application such as motion-control.
Charles Moore became a big expert on a subject that has been dead for
a quarter-century now.

On 9/10/2021 11:48, Hugh Aguilar wrote:

> (I never applied for work as
> a programmer again after I found out that Testra wasn't giving me a reference).

Which nobody here can fix.

On 9/10/2021 11:48, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>
> My point is that doing something that has never been done before will end badly.
> Trying to brag about MFX never works --- invariably some code-monkey will say:
> "I wrote a Forth compiler too! It was useless, but fun to write. I'm your peer!"
> For example, DXforth has his Z80 Forth for CP/M that was very likely copied
> out of the book: "Threaded Interpretive Languages" (R.G. Loeliger).
> Now we have Ron Aaron bragging about programming in 8086 assembly-language
> that he thinks is comparable to MFX assembly-language. It isn't.

The references to Loeliger suggests you know more about it than I do. Did you
ever write a Z80 Forth? Because I never did. I'll be the first to admit I've
never programmed commercially. There are surely easier ways of making a living
than following a job spec that changes day by day. Everything I know has been
learnt from those who came before. I've never seen evidence of virgin birth -
just folks claiming it to be so - for financial reasons.

On Saturday, 9 October 2021 at 01:48:50 UTC+1, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 10:35:48 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
> > On 08/10/2021 3:44, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> > > 1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
> > > (terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was invented by
> > > MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
> > > Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.
> > I didn't say I invented TSR programs, you absolute spoon.
> >
> > You need to develop some reading comprehension skills (among many other
> > things).
> >
> > The techniques I developed were cool IMO and in the opinions of my
> > coworkers and employer at the time. One of the programs I wrote was
> > bought out by Intel. That mattered to me then; now, it's dinosaur bones
> > and nobody cares, which is what my point was, you utter disgrace.
> What technique was that?
> You just bought one of the many books on TSRs and copied all of the code
> out of the book --- and you bought the book with American foreign-aid money.
>
> My point is that doing something that has never been done before will end badly.
> Trying to brag about MFX never works --- invariably some code-monkey will say:
> "I wrote a Forth compiler too! It was useless, but fun to write. I'm your peer!"
> For example, DXforth has his Z80 Forth for CP/M that was very likely copied
> out of the book: "Threaded Interpretive Languages" (R.G. Loeliger).
> Now we have Ron Aaron bragging about programming in 8086 assembly-language
> that he thinks is comparable to MFX assembly-language. It isn't.
>
> This is why it is so dumb that Tom Hart wants all of the glory of MFX
> for Testra, and none for me --- he refuses to admit that I wrote MFX.
> There is no glory! Tom Hart and John Hart became liars, and they obtained nothing
> in return --- they could have just told the truth that I wrote MFX --- all C programmers
> in the world will say that Forth is retarded and Testra should have just used C,
> and all Forth programmers will say that ANS-Forth is retarded so they have switched
> to C, and all C/Forth programmers (such as Anton Ertl, Bernd Paysan, etc.) will brag
> that they have written a Forth in C which was useless but fun to write.
>
> MFX is something that I'm proud of.
> Haters such as Tom Hart, Juergen Pintaske, Ron Aaron, etc., can't make me
> feel ashamed of having written MFX --- I succeeded at what had never
> been done before. BTW: I refer to the MiniForth as a VLIW processor.
> John Hart never mentioned the term 'VLIW' or 'WISC' when I worked there.
> If he had, I could have read up on the subject --- this is assuming that there are
> books available, which there might not be (I've never researched the subject
> so I wouldn't know if there are any books or not) --- I just figured it out
> as I went, and only much later did I read about VLIW and WISC and think:
> "That seems to be the same thing that I was doing at Testra."
> So I'm a big expert on a subject that almost nobody else has read about,
> and I haven't read anything on the subject either --- this isn't something
> that can be put on a resume --- plus, Testra doesn't give me a job reference,
> so I can't have a resume listing Testra anyway (I never applied for work as
> a programmer again after I found out that Testra wasn't giving me a reference).
>
> VLIW is dead now --- that was 1990s technology --- it is not competitive now.
> Charles Moore most likely had a similar experience.
> His RTX2000 was very expensive, and it had only about the same level
> of performance as the MC68K --- the MiniForth based on the Lattice
> isp1048 PLD was less expensive than the MC68K with higher performance.
> The RTX2000 didn't get used for any useful application such as motion-control.
> Charles Moore became a big expert on a subject that has been dead for
> a quarter-century now.

It is as usual disgusting how you talk about other people.
Especially how you talk about Chuck and his achievements.
You seem to forget, that without him we all would not be here.
And you would not have the audience - as this seems to be the only one you have.
Take your medication and go to bed.
Everybody who has a different opinion is a lier for you.
Welcome to 7 billion liers and you on your island.

On 2021-10-09 3:48, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 10:35:48 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
>> On 08/10/2021 3:44, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>>> 1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
>>> (terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was invented by
>>> MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
>>> Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.
>> I didn't say I invented TSR programs, you absolute spoon.
>>
>> You need to develop some reading comprehension skills (among many other
>> things).
>>
>> The techniques I developed were cool IMO and in the opinions of my
>> coworkers and employer at the time. One of the programs I wrote was
>> bought out by Intel. That mattered to me then; now, it's dinosaur bones
>> and nobody cares, which is what my point was, you utter disgrace.
>
> What technique was that?
> You just bought one of the many books on TSRs and copied all of the code
> out of the book --- and you bought the book with American foreign-aid money.

OK, Karen.

One of the techniques was developing a method for monitoring battery
drain via estimation of current drain from those peripherals I could
monitor. The algorithm was self-correcting after a few drain cycles and
could reasonably accurately predict battery life. This was in the era
before "smart batteries", so each variety of laptop necessitated me
disassembling it and using a multimeter to determine base drains.

Another technique was making it possible to use the same essential code
on a 'generic' laptop (with less accuracy).

I never bought any books on TSRs; and at the time I lived in the US
(where I was born), you donkey.

On 10/10/2021 03:31, Ron AARON wrote:
>
>
> On 2021-10-09 3:48, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 10:35:48 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
>>> On 08/10/2021 3:44, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>>>> 1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
>>>> (terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was invented by
>>>> MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
>>>> Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.
>>> I didn't say I invented TSR programs, you absolute spoon.
>>>
>>> You need to develop some reading comprehension skills (among many other
>>> things).
>>>
>>> The techniques I developed were cool IMO and in the opinions of my
>>> coworkers and employer at the time. One of the programs I wrote was
>>> bought out by Intel. That mattered to me then; now, it's dinosaur bones
>>> and nobody cares, which is what my point was, you utter disgrace.
>>
>> What technique was that?
>> You just bought one of the many books on TSRs and copied all of the code
>> out of the book --- and you bought the book with American foreign-aid money.
>
> OK, Karen.
> ...

'Oh Carol' ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4brYfcHQR0

"Though you treat me cruel
You hurt me
And you make me cry
But if you leave me
I will surely die"

On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 07:38:04 UTC+1, Jurgen Pitaske wrote:
> Rolf Hemmerling posted this in different Forth facebook groups:
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/PROGRAMMINGFORTH
>
> Forth2020
> orSepgtateumbemgri 28 oat 2:or52e PugdM ·
> 🥳Great news for our next Zoom meeting October 9. ! WOW ! Please share with more Forth friends on different channels. We will have the great presentations and super interesting themes as ever. Join &participate ->https://www.facebook.com/groups/forth2020
>
> It is scheduled that my Forth2020 Facebook group will have a zoom meeting with "Chuck", what an honor!
> Oh sorry folks, not "Chuck Norris", but "Charles (Chuck) Moore", the creator of the Forth programming language, 50 years ago 🙂
> https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=170644201881192&id=100123365599943
And Rolf posted now two links to the chat,
saw it in the Forth facebook group

Rolf Hemmerling
This is an edited video of Chuck's appearance in our Zoom call meeting, he answered a lot

🙂 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoyDNIcnpgc
Chuck Moore and Dutch Fig talk in our Zoom-meeting October 9 2021 Recording 1920x1080
YOUTUBE.COM

and

Chuck Moore and Dutch Fig talk in our Zoom-meeting October 9 2021 Recording 1920x1080

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYL7anO05wo

Enjoy

By the look of the thread, division in forth is still going.

There is a lack of strong leadership in forth. Maybe Borland's interest in forth was as close as it got.

Charles is not it. Reverse polish notation and stack machines were out a long time before forth. Research it. We got opportunity instead, which kept being squandered, and a whole bunch of divisive people who thought they were better. We got a number of businesses and people in them who were regarded themselves, but were divisive towards bringing things together to a better outcome. Maybe the only full on business I knew of, was MPE.

Forth has faded. We may well deserve that. It's not best of best, it's best of what we wanted instead, which is not best. We have not gathered together the best of the best in little countries, but made little islands which history will soon try to forget.

On 14/10/2021 18:31, Wayne morellini wrote:
> By the look of the thread, division in forth is still going.

Division always exists. Just insufficient reason to put it aside.

On Thursday, October 14, 2021 at 8:31:39 AM UTC+1, Wayne morellini wrote:
> By the look of the thread, division in forth is still going.
>
> There is a lack of strong leadership in forth. Maybe Borland's interest in forth was as close as it got.
>
> Charles is not it. Reverse polish notation and stack machines were out a long time before forth. Research it. We got opportunity instead, which kept being squandered, and a whole bunch of divisive people who thought they were better. We got a number of businesses and people in them who were regarded themselves, but were divisive towards bringing things together to a better outcome. Maybe the only full on business I knew of, was MPE.
>
> Forth has faded. We may well deserve that. It's not best of best, it's best of what we wanted instead, which is not best. We have not gathered together the best of the best in little countries, but made little islands which history will soon try to forget.

From observation, and empirically, the 'spirit of Forth' and 'leadership/followership' are pretty disjoint concepts, aren't they?

On 14/10/2021 18:31, Wayne morellini wrote:
>
> Maybe Borland's interest in forth was as close as it got.

Borland made the joke they wouldn't touch Forth as it was a religion.
What they meant of course is Forth was unable to deliver them sufficient
followers to make it commercially viable /because/ forthers are a picky
lot with an annoying habit of questioning authority.

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use"
- Galileo Galilei

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:31:46 AM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
> On 2021-10-09 3:48, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 10:35:48 PM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
> >> On 08/10/2021 3:44, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> >>> 1.) There are multiple books available on how to write a TSR
> >>> (terminate and stay resident MS-DOS program). This technique was invented by
> >>> MicroSoft and used in MS-DOS from day one (their print-screen facility).
> >>> Ron Aaron didn't invent anything.
> >> I didn't say I invented TSR programs, you absolute spoon.
> >>
> >> You need to develop some reading comprehension skills (among many other
> >> things).
> >>
> >> The techniques I developed were cool IMO and in the opinions of my
> >> coworkers and employer at the time. One of the programs I wrote was
> >> bought out by Intel. That mattered to me then; now, it's dinosaur bones
> >> and nobody cares, which is what my point was, you utter disgrace.
> >
> > What technique was that?
> > You just bought one of the many books on TSRs and copied all of the code
> > out of the book --- and you bought the book with American foreign-aid money.
> OK, Karen.
>
> One of the techniques was developing a method for monitoring battery
> drain via estimation of current drain from those peripherals I could
> monitor. The algorithm was self-correcting after a few drain cycles and
> could reasonably accurately predict battery life. This was in the era
> before "smart batteries", so each variety of laptop necessitated me
> disassembling it and using a multimeter to determine base drains.

I remember after I finished MFX that the motion-control program for the
laser-etcher was ported from the 80c320 to the MiniForth and Testra began
producing MiniForth motion-control boards for use in laser-etchers.
Tom Hart told me: "You would be a lot more useful if you knew how to solder
together boards and test them."
This seemed unfair to me because I had hired on as a programmer,
not an electronics technician, so I left.

I think that the fact that you know how to use a multimeter to check the
current drain on a laptop is pretty awesome! I'll bet you even know Ohm's Law!
You could get a job at Testra! Tom Hart would be very impressed by your skill-set.
Tom Hart never did any design work or anything else that could be considered
to be engineering. The only programming that he ever did was a text-based
user-interface library written in UR/Forth for MS-DOS that nobody ever used.
You are not capable of learning MFX assembly-language, although you might be
capable of learning how to use MFX Forth cross-compiler --- more likely though,
you would only be capable of learning how to use the interactive Forth that was
written in MFX. You could join the parade of losers that Testra hired after I left.

I actually know how to use a multimeter because I work on my car engine's wiring,
but that is not really my bailiwick. As for soldering electronics, I did work at that
for a while after leaving Testra; it pays better than ditch-digging and it is
out of the sun. Soldering copper pipes (what I do now) pays a lot more.

> I never bought any books on TSRs; and at the time I lived in the US
> (where I was born), you donkey.

So now you are telling us that you did invent TSRs. Which is it?

Also, the fact that you lived in the U.S. doesn't mean that you weren't
receiving Israel's foreign-aid money from America prior to moving
to Israel from America. If you were an American citizen, but then
switched your citizenship to Israel, then you are a traitor to America.
You're an Israeli foreign-aid pig now, and also presumably before you left America.
Please tell us: At what moment exactly did you become 100% loyal to Israel
and 100% hateful to America? Was this while you were still an American citizen?

On Thursday, October 14, 2021 at 12:31:39 AM UTC-7, Wayne morellini wrote:
> There is a lack of strong leadership in forth. Maybe Borland's interest in forth was as close as it got.

Why would sucking Philippe Kahn's hairy ass be better than sucking Elizabeth Rather's fat ass?
Yummier?
Either way, you have no future except to be a customer --- get your check-book out!

I wrote MFX in UR/Forth from Laboratory Microsystems Inc. (LMI). At that time LMI had
gone out of business because ANS-Forth had declared UR/Forth to be non-standard by
fiat, despite the fact that UR/Forth was far-away the dominant Forth of the time.
Testra had obtained UR/Forth source-code but had signed an NDA which is I had not signed,
so I could still use UR/Forth while employed at Testra, but I didn't own UR/Forth.
> Charles is not it. Reverse polish notation and stack machines were out a long time before forth.
> Research it. We got opportunity instead, which kept being squandered, and a whole bunch of
> divisive people who thought they were better. We got a number of businesses and people in them
> who were regarded themselves, but were divisive towards bringing things together
> to a better outcome. Maybe the only full on business I knew of, was MPE.

I didn't say that Charles Moore is it --- neither MPE.
I'm not really into sucking anybody's ass, and I don't want any leeches stuck to my ass either.

I think that the possibility existed (and may still exist) for Forth to acquire a standard
developed by Forth programmers rather than corporate sales clowns, that supports
general-purpose data-structures and allows code-libraries to be portable between vendors.
This could have been done in the late 1980s as a replacement to the crappy Forth-83 standard
that Elizabeth Rather gave us --- instead, Elizabeth Rather gave us the crappy ANS-Forth standard.
Now it is 2021 and Stephen Pelc is giving us the crappy Forth-200x standard.
We have yet to start on a Forth standard designed by Forth programmers rather than
corporate sales clowns --- until this gets done, Forth will continue to be a failure.

Changed the title so people are warned about the rabbit-hole...

On 15/10/2021 7:42, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:31:46 AM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:

> I think that the fact that you know how to use a multimeter to check
> the current drain on a laptop is pretty awesome! I'll bet you even
> know Ohm's Law!

Ineffectual attempt to use sarcasm to "score points" noted.

>> I never bought any books on TSRs; and at the time I lived in the US
>> (where I was born), you donkey.

> So now you are telling us that you did invent TSRs. Which is it?

One of the things I most appreciate about you, Hugh, is your absolute
binary mode of thinking. No nuance there, whatsoever. It's refreshing,
in this day of supposed "non-binary" people.

> Also, the fact that you lived in the U.S. doesn't mean that you
> weren't receiving Israel's foreign-aid money from America prior to
> moving

.... reset of idiotic screed snipped...

For anyone who is actually interested, the US has for a long while now
permitted "dual citizenship", with the proviso that such individuals
must obey the laws of both countries. There are US citizens holding
such citizenship with the United Kingdom, and France, and Sweden, to
name but a few.

Are they also "traitors to America", Hugh? You absolutist imbecile.

And also: no Israeli citizen receives "US foreign aid money". That's
not a thing, Hugh. Almost all the "aid" Israel receives is military,
and the funds are required to be spent back in the US, at Raytheon et.
al. It's a way for the US gov't to fund its military industries
without doing so directly. I, for one, am against it (as I've stated
before).

On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 12:30:33 AM UTC-5, Ron AARON wrote:
> Changed the title so people are warned about the rabbit-hole...
> On 15/10/2021 7:42, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:31:46 AM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
>
> For anyone who is actually interested, the US has for a long while now
> permitted "dual citizenship", with the proviso that such individuals
> must obey the laws of both countries. There are US citizens holding
>

A young Italian-american field service engineer was sent to Italy on
a job. He enjoyed it so much the first thing he did when he returned
was to get dual citizenship. On his next trip to Italy, on assignment,
he was held at the airport on his arrival and then hauled off to boot
camp.
--
me

On 15/10/2021 23:44, S Jack wrote:
> On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 12:30:33 AM UTC-5, Ron AARON wrote:
>> Changed the title so people are warned about the rabbit-hole...
>> On 15/10/2021 7:42, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>> > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:31:46 AM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
>>
>> For anyone who is actually interested, the US has for a long while now
>> permitted "dual citizenship", with the proviso that such individuals
>> must obey the laws of both countries. There are US citizens holding
>>
>
> A young Italian-american field service engineer was sent to Italy on
> a job. He enjoyed it so much the first thing he did when he returned
> was to get dual citizenship. On his next trip to Italy, on assignment,
> he was held at the airport on his arrival and then hauled off to boot
> camp.

Who didn't do his homework :) Several Australian Members of Parliament
apparently didn't know that merely being born of parents from another
country could amount to dual-citizenship, rendering them ineligible to
stand as MP's.

On 15/10/2021 15:44, S Jack wrote:
> On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 12:30:33 AM UTC-5, Ron AARON wrote:
>> Changed the title so people are warned about the rabbit-hole...
>> On 15/10/2021 7:42, Hugh Aguilar wrote:
>>> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:31:46 AM UTC-7, Ron AARON wrote:
>>
>> For anyone who is actually interested, the US has for a long while now
>> permitted "dual citizenship", with the proviso that such individuals
>> must obey the laws of both countries. There are US citizens holding
>>
>
> A young Italian-american field service engineer was sent to Italy on
> a job. He enjoyed it so much the first thing he did when he returned
> was to get dual citizenship. On his next trip to Italy, on assignment,
> he was held at the airport on his arrival and then hauled off to boot
> camp.
> --
> me

Heh. Yeah, acquiring Israeli citizenship gets you drafted here, as well.
I expect most people do know that, though; it's not a secret...