Fourth language

[W1GUH]

The thread about 8-bit computers reminded me of the game port on the back of the Commodore 64. One of the things I got for it was the Fourth language.

Command line interpreter that used Reverse Polish Notation, and was written by an astronomer to control his telescope.

I didn't do much with it, but it was fun to play with for a while.

[AE6IP]

I believe you mean "forth" which was designed by Charles Moore at NRAO.

Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forth_(programming_language)) is the wikipedia article on the language.

I've used forth for a lot of stuff. It was fairly popular in embedded systems at one time because it gave a lot of power with very little overhead.

[n0ov]

Ah yes --Commodore 64. 1st time I typed my name and saw "systex error" it pissed me off and I've been fighting with computers ever since.

Learned a lot about basic programming with that box and computer magazines --- spent ours of typing code to see how programs worked.

Lessons learned helped when I was called to help create some procedure in dBase II, dBase III and dBase III+

Good memories

[KG6YTZ]

I still have [and use] dBase III+. #I have a book on programming it, too, but I'm not exactly sure where it is at the moment.

Forth? #I've never used it. #There was a plug-in Forth module available for the Timex/Sinclair 1000, but I never owned one of those modules, although I wanted one. I've programmed dBase [only very simple short stuff], SALT [Script Applications Language for Telix], and assorted dialects of BASIC. #<thinks> TRS-BASIC, Tandy Color BASIC, Sinclair BASIC, BASICA, GWBASIC, APBasic, QuickBASIC 4.5, and Microsoft BASIC 7.1 [a.k.a. PDS or Professional Development System]. #I'm still using PDS, and recently released a new version of my Bearcat 101 code generator (http://members.aol.com/xfire905/bcprog.htm) which is written in that language.

I have VB6; just can't quite get the hang of it. #I need "VB6 For Dummies." #I'd also like to have Power BASIC (http://www.powerbasic.com).

[WA9SVD]

The Forth language had a lot of devotees in the late 70's and early 80's, when people programmed computers, rather than loading applications. It's a language well suited (by design) for controlling mechanisms, and many of the devotees used Forth to control sophisticated model train layouts. (The Commodore PET, Apple ][, and the TS-1000 were popular with the railroaders.)

[KG6YTZ]

What got my geek blood going was this notion of using Forth to virtually define my own programming language. I really wanted to do that. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[WA7KKP]

Quote[/b] (n0ov @ May 04 2007,13:25)]Ah yes --Commodore 64. #1st time I typed my name and saw "systex error" it pissed me off and I've been fighting with computers ever since.
And you think that was bad?

How about programming a mainframe computer (Xerox Data Systems Sigma VII) via Teletype terminal, dial-up acoustic coupled modem (handset in the cups), using punched paper tape for program loading and saving,

and then . . .

Typing cards on a cardpunch for true batch programming. No feedback, until you attemped to run the program and it quit at the first bad syntax. You had to re-run it several times to get it to work right.

Those days ticked me off -- and I swore at computers.

Until I got my VIC-20, and discovered machine language.

Gary WA7KKP

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (WA7KKP @ May 09 2007,12:52)]Quote[/b] (n0ov @ May 04 2007,13:25)]Ah yes --Commodore 64. #1st time I typed my name and saw "systex error" it pissed me off and I've been fighting with computers ever since.
And you think that was bad?

How about programming a mainframe computer (Xerox Data Systems Sigma VII) via Teletype terminal, dial-up acoustic coupled modem (handset in the cups), using punched paper tape for program loading and saving,

and then . . .

Typing cards on a cardpunch for true batch programming. #No feedback, until you attemped to run the program and it quit at the first bad syntax. #You had to re-run it several times to get it to work right.

Those days ticked me off -- and I swore at computers.

Until I got my VIC-20, and discovered machine language.

Gary WA7KKP
Yep. That is how I first started doing my FORTRAN programs back in the 1970's. Each card had to be syntactically correct and the deck of cards had to be stacked in the proper order. Then I had to submit the cards for batch processing. #Overnight an operator would show up, pick up the cards and run the job. The next day my cards would be waiting for me along with a strip of 133 column greenbar paper with the listing and output of my program. There was no interation with the operations staff or the operator who ran my cards. I had no idea who he/she even was.

If there was even a single syntax error the program failed. I would have to locate the error, retype new card(s), resubmit the job and wait another 24 hours.

When I finally got to program the PDP-11, DEC-20 and VAXen via an interactive DECWriter teleprinter terminal (LA36), and later on a #VT-100 monochrome CRT it was a pleasure. I could actually log into an account, enter and save my programs in my allocated disc space and actually compile and run them and see my results immediatly.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (WA7KKP @ May 09 2007,12:52)]Quote[/b] (n0ov @ May 04 2007,13:25)]Ah yes --Commodore 64. #1st time I typed my name and saw "systex error" it pissed me off and I've been fighting with computers ever since.
And you think that was bad?

How about programming a mainframe computer (Xerox Data Systems Sigma VII) via Teletype terminal, dial-up acoustic coupled modem (handset in the cups), using punched paper tape for program loading and saving,

and then . . .

Typing cards on a cardpunch for true batch programming. #No feedback, until you attemped to run the program and it quit at the first bad syntax. #You had to re-run it several times to get it to work right.

Those days ticked me off -- and I swore at computers.

Until I got my VIC-20, and discovered machine language.

Gary WA7KKP
I still enjoy interpreting machine code and programmimg in Assembly. Lots of people will ask, with all of todays modern langauges why waste time with leaning assembly or how to interpret machine opcodes. If for no other reason learning Assembly helps one to understand what is going on "under the hood" when you use higher level langauges. You become more adept at writing efficent code and debugging. If you are using a langauge like C or C++ you gain a better understanding of how memory is utilized, how floating points work, how stack space is utilized, how function calls are made, how data is pushed and popped to/from the stack, how registers are utilized and how data is moved between memory and registers. Once those fundimental principles are understood it yields a much clearer picture of just what thet higher level langauge is doing and why it balks and chokes from time to time

[ab1ga]

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ May 09 2007,15:55)]If you are using a langauge like C or C++ you gain a better understanding of how memory is utilized, how floating points work, how stack space is utilized, how function calls are made, how data is pushed and popped to/from the stack, how registers are utilized and how data is moved between memory and registers. Once those fundimental principles are understood it yields a much clearer picture of just what thet higher level langauge is doing and why it balks and chokes from time to time
And once you've figured out just how much work it is to keep it all straight, you begin to take pity on the compiler writers and realize the true evil that lurks in the heart of the language designer...

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif