Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!unmvax!unmvax.cs.unm.edu!4rst From: 4rst@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (Forrest Black) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: 80286 Forths? Keywords: 80286, ANSI, PD Message-ID: <274@unmvax.unm.edu> Date: 10 Aug 89 12:02:47 GMT Sender: 4rst@unmvax.unm.edu Reply-To: 4rst@unmvax.cs.unm.edu Distribution: usa Lines: 27 Organization: Greetings, NetBeings! I have been playing with some PD Forth compilers on my AT klone for 3 months now, and I am starting to realize why many Forth advocates seem quite fanatical, nay, rabid, in their praises/defense of Forth. Once past the initial confusion, one can indeed create small, fast, interesting programs in a short time. This is not true of my milk language, Pascal, IMHO. However, my learning process is hampered by the tendency for the Forths I have to crash my machine unmercifully when I goof. I am used to this from testing assembler programs on PC's, but there *must* be a better way. Has anyone out there seen a (PD or not) Forth system that runs in protected mode on 286/386 machines? Uh, no OS/2 suggestions, please, thank you. I may end up attempting to roll my own (yikes! man-months!), and I imagine I would need some standards information. Is there some place I can anonymous ftp to snag 83-standard description? And is there really a new ANSI standard in the works? I hope this isn't all old hat, and clogging the net. Thanks for your time! --4rst 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ++++ My onions are my own. ++++ 4rst@{doc,unmvax}.cs.unm.edu ++++ 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 I finally saw the thousand points of light! After running into a door....