| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 05.10.96 16:49l 201 Lines 7187 Bytes #-10864 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_96_206
Read: DG7DAH GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 96/206
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0MW<DB0ERF<DB0HSK<DB0QS<DB0PKE<
PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8WFL<PI8MBQ<PI8VNW
Sent: 961005/1116Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:15649 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA18231 ; Sat, 05 Oct 96 10:13:50 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00005547 ; Sat, 05 Oct 96 03:18:33 MET
Received: from pa2aga-10 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00005516 ; Sat, 05 Oct 96 03:07:23 MET
Received: from pa2aga-10 by pa2aga-10 (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00005772 ; Sat, 05 Oct 96 03:07:12 MET
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 96 17:50:46 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_96_206>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-10
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 96/206
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
TCP-Group Digest Mon, 30 Sep 96 Volume 96 : Issue 206
Today's Topics:
FORTH in NOS (4 msgs)
TNOS/Linux with modem baycom (not USCC) ?
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 01:07:51 +0100 (BST)
From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox)
Subject: FORTH in NOS
> FORTH? How 80's! Now a Java engine would be slick.
You left an extra letter 'l' in the last word
HTH
Alan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 00:46:20 +0100 (BST)
From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox)
Subject: FORTH in NOS
> over the past few years.. But I think I remember somebody, back
> in the late 80's or very early 90's posting to this group that
> he had added a Forth engine to NOS.
Yes. And it actually seemed to work just about. Of course to be fashionable
now you should add a java engine to NOS so you can do nothing useful at
1/10th of the speed.
I don't have the forth code saved and I think it was NET rather than NOS
that had it, but you are not imagining it
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: jmorriso@bogomips.com (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: FORTH in NOS
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 23:22:54 -0600 (MDT)
> From: wa7nwp@wa7nwp.ampr.org
> Subject: FORTH in NOS (fwd)
>
> > > Subject: FORTH in NOS
> > >
> > > But I think I remember somebody, back
> > > in the late 80's or very early 90's posting to this group that
> > > he had added a Forth engine to NOS.
> >
> > FORTH? How 80's! Now a Java engine would be slick.
> >
> > > Bill - WA7NWP
> > > vodall@bigsky.com
> >
> > jmorriso@bogomips.com ve7jpm@ve7jpm.ampr.org jmorriso@ve7ubc.ampr.org
>
>
> Yes it would. And BASIC. And PERL. And many other higher level
> interpreted languages.
>
> It's my opinion (and very humble at that here on this discussion group) that
> a weakness of NOS is its lack of a high level, demand loaded, shared
> resource language for user applications and servers. Right now, the
> mailbox and all other functions are hard coded at compile time. Changes
> are not trivial and few possess the skill and even fewer the time to
> work on the core program.
>
A high level interpretted language might be useful, but a more
general program loader would be better. Plugins seem to be the
rage in every program. Plugins for 16bit NOS would be difficult to
implement, but with the 32bit DJGPP version that Phil Karn released,
and with Brian's announcment that he would port TNOS to DJGPP,
this should be easy to do using Gnu dld. It might even make it easier
to port NOS applications to operating systems that provide TCP/IP, AX.25
and NetROM services in the kernel (eg Linux).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BogoMIPS Research Labs -- bogosity research & simulation -- VE7JPM --
jmorriso@bogomips.com ve7jpm@ve7jpm.ampr.org jmorriso@ve7ubc.ampr.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 19:30:59 -0500
From: Steve Sampson <ssampson@oklahoma.net>
Subject: FORTH in NOS
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > over the past few years.. But I think I remember somebody, back
> > in the late 80's or very early 90's posting to this group that
> > he had added a Forth engine to NOS.
>
> Yes. And it actually seemed to work just about. Of course to be
> fashionable now you should add a java engine to NOS so you can do
> nothing useful at 1/10th of the speed.
>
> I don't have the forth code saved and I think it was NET rather
> than NOS that had it, but you are not imagining it
I forget the name now, and I did a quick search, but there was a
page I saw that discussed a Web server written in Java. There was
also the discussion of how it compared in speed. As I recall it
was faster than the NCSA server, but slower than the Netscape. But
they felt it was worth continuing on, as there will soon be native
compilers, and the speed would then surpass the C code. 1/10 the
speed at 200 MHz or 166 MHz doesn't mean much today, it's still
faster than Morse Code.
Over the last 10 years there have been about 4000 memory leaks fixed
and re-fixed. At least you don't have a memory leak with Java :-)
Can't say much about the rest, because I'm at the Java 101 level, but
I'm not jumping on the hype-train just yet, and finding it an useful
language. My own personal feeling, is that Java for me will replace
Perl.
This message doesn't have much to do with Forth, but if you want to
know why Forth was never a mainstream language, you should read the
Doctor Dobbs magazines about the time the language was hitting the
street. They were trying to get an article out of the inventor, and
instead got a mail barrage threating lawsuits, etc. It was really
sad, and I never looked at the language since. I think I was learning
Small-C or some such 8080 product, and working in Reverse Polish is
limited to my HP-48 calculator :-)
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 17:12:54 -0300 (EST)
From: Joao Fabio de Oliveira <jfabio@arpa.arauc.br>
Subject: TNOS/Linux with modem baycom (not USCC) ?
Hi All,
I'm using TNOS 2.02 with Linux kernel 1.3.48 and USCC Card Baycom no
problems. But I would like to use with the "small" modem baycom (not
USCC Card) with Linux (for example, PacCom BayPac).
Somebody know if I can compile the kernel Linux for this modem ? The
Linux have support for this device ?
Thanks for help me.
Joao Fabio, PU5PJF
Univesity Federal of Parana State, Curitiba, Brasil
jfabio@arpa.arauc.br / pu5pjf@arpa.ampr.orgA
------------------------------
End of TCP-Group Digest V96 #206
******************************
You can send your message for this bulletin
to: tcp-group@pa2aga on .AMPR.ORG-net
or: tcpaga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu on BBS-net
------
NOT TO: pa2aga@pa2aga or pa2aga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu PLEASE!!
It will get posted automatically within a few days
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
