Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
Posted by
caedave
on 2005-07-24 04:36:28 UTC
Thanks Alex, you saved me having to write all that.
I shall be keeping mine (couple of projects in mind)
Forth has lots of Port I/O Words (commands) and register shifts and rotates
so writing the comms part of a program is easy. It also has full support to
call other language compiled programs and routines.
Just got to re-learn the Reverse Polish Notation methode again of doing
the maths and learn all the new Windows (GUI) handling stuff that's been
added since I last played.
Google search of "Forth" will through up a few sites with FREE downloads
of the program (open source) and tutorials, and a yahoo groups search on
the same has some groups, a couple of which are in the hundred plus
membership.
Dave M.
I shall be keeping mine (couple of projects in mind)
Forth has lots of Port I/O Words (commands) and register shifts and rotates
so writing the comms part of a program is easy. It also has full support to
call other language compiled programs and routines.
Just got to re-learn the Reverse Polish Notation methode again of doing
the maths and learn all the new Windows (GUI) handling stuff that's been
added since I last played.
Google search of "Forth" will through up a few sites with FREE downloads
of the program (open source) and tutorials, and a yahoo groups search on
the same has some groups, a couple of which are in the hundred plus
membership.
Dave M.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Holden" <alex@...>
Subject: Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
> On 23 Jul 2005, at 23:14, Roy J. Tellason wrote:
>> (Never saw a Jupiter ACE, though. :-)
>
> They're pretty rare now; probably worth a few bob.
>
>> So I looked into it, and while there's a fair amount of programming
>> capability in there, it was real difficult for me to see how this
>> could be
>> used in any sort of a control application. Maybe that was particular
>> extensions that were written for it or something? In any case,
>> I'd like to
>> implement some stuff using it, but need to find more info, if any
>> of you
>> guys know of any.
>
> Forth's popularity is waning now (the UK Forth Interest Group
> recently announced they will no longer be publishing a journal), but
> there are still plenty of die-hards around who claim that Forth lets
> them be several times as productive as C programmers. Forth has some
> unusual features which make it well suited for low level control type
> applications. The language, the development environment, and the OS
> (typically with multitasking ability) are all part and parcel of a
> traditional embedded Forth system. Despite this, the systems are
> usually very small (much smaller than a comparable C based OS and
> toolchain). Forth systems are traditionally interactive- you connect
> a terminal up to them, write snippets of code, and immediately try
> them out. The language is very extensible- in effect you write a
> Forth program by inventing your own words (describing them using
> sentences of simpler built-in words or words that you have already
> invented yourself) and then eventually making a top-level sentence
> out of your invented words. This interactivity and extensibility
> encourages bottom-up development, which is great when the main
> purpose of the program is to interface to hardware, as in most
> embedded control systems. Forth is also usually pretty fast - not as
> fast as C, but much faster than a BASIC interpreter, and the code it
> produces is generally very compact indeed - much more compact than
> compiled C code (part of this is due to the development philosophy
> which encourages the use of lots of very short reusable words).
>
> The way I see it, Forth is a useful tool for low level stuff (eg.
> interactively debugging a new piece of hardware), but it can be
> difficult to understand other people's Forth code (especially if they
> haven't bothered with comments), and high level stuff can get ugly,
> especially all the manual data stack manipulation.
>
> There are also a couple of companies which sell expensive
> professional Forth development systems for embedded systems which
> include a flashy GUI and optimising compilers that produce code about
> as fast as compiled C code. They're intended to compete directly with
> the high-end C development systems.
> http://www.forth.com/
> http://www.mpeltd.demon.co.uk/
>
>> I think an outboard box with 8-bit parts running Forth might make
>> one heck of
>> a nifty addition to a CAM setup... :-D
>
> There's lots of ready-built Forth hardware around, including more
> powerful stuff like tiny LPC2106 (60Mhz 32 bit ARM with 64K of RAM
> and 128K of Flash) based boards:
> http://www.mpeltd.demon.co.uk/tiniarm.htm
>
> --
> ------------ Alex Holden - http://www.alexholden.net/ ------------
> If it doesn't work, you're not hitting it with a big enough hammer
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 22/07/2005
Discussion Thread
ibewgypsie
2005-07-23 05:39:52 UTC
EMC? Jon ?
caedave
2005-07-23 07:34:31 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
davegsc@t...
2005-07-23 09:18:38 UTC
RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
Roy J. Tellason
2005-07-23 15:19:36 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
Jon Elson
2005-07-23 15:41:35 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
ibewgypsie
2005-07-23 17:39:21 UTC
Re: EMC? Jon ?
Alex Holden
2005-07-24 01:06:44 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
caedave
2005-07-24 04:36:28 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
Roy J. Tellason
2005-07-24 09:44:51 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
Roy J. Tellason
2005-07-24 09:50:41 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
Alex Holden
2005-07-24 11:30:23 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
KM6VV
2005-07-24 11:59:50 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?
caedave
2005-07-24 15:55:06 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] EMC? Jon ?