<MrMobius> cheater, the HP calculators juggle basic statements to get them into forth form. you could do that to interchange the two in the same program
<cheater> MrMobius: that's still two separate langs
Gromboli1 has joined #forth
Gromboli has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Gromboli1 is now known as Gromboli
<MrMobius> cheater, then the answer to your question is no I think. you need some way to tell the compiler/interpretter what mode youre in
WilhelmVonWeiner has joined #forth
<cheater> i don't want two modes
<cheater> just something with some features from basic, and some features from forth, that's all
<cheater> i don't know why everyone's all like "oh you want two languages at the same time" no i don't
<cheater> :)
<lispmacs[work]> cheater: well, BASIC is a language with a certain syntax that has to be checked, forth is a language that just executes word that operating on a stack
<cheater> what do you mean by "checked"?
<cheater> do you mean tokenized?
<cheater> lispmacs[work] ^
<lispmacs[work]> cheater: most languages, you have a syntax where words have to appear in a certain order, like the grammar of a language, and if that input is not correct, the sentence is not compiled or executed
<lispmacs[work]> Forth, you throw a word at it and it does that. If it fails trying, it throws an error
<cheater> oh right
<cheater> yeah, interesting
<cheater> i mean you don't have to have both at the same time, right
<lispmacs[work]> constructs in forth where you seem to have a syntax are actually just a trick of switching between interpreter and compiler mode
<cheater> you can choose and match
<cheater> oh
<cheater> i had no idea
<lispmacs[work]> so, you got to pick if you want a forth that looks like a basic, or a BASIC that has some words names borrowed from forth, or switch between the two languages
<lispmacs[work]> 1 1 + in forth is really just (tell interpreter to put 1 on the stack) (tell interpreter to put 1 on the stack) (try to add top two stack items). PRINT 1 + 1 in BASIC would be something like turning that into a syntax tree, and going up (or down?) through the tree to confirm we have the correct number and type of arguments for each function being called (PRINT and +)
<lispmacs[work]> I haven't used BASIC in like two decades...
WickedShell has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<lispmacs[work]> good ol' qbasic
<lispmacs[work]> and whatever it was running on my Apple IIe
<MrMobius> cheater, youd have to give an example of what this hypothetical forth/basic combination would look like then
<cheater> i'm wondering myself
<cheater> what if instead of a stack we had a syntax tree
<cheater> then PRINT would just be a node within the syntax tree, with one hole to fill in using a thing that's printable
<cheater> similar to how you put stuff on the stack in forth, you'd put stuff on the tree with this thing
fiddlerwoaroof has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
fiddlerwoaroof has joined #forth
boru` has joined #forth
boru has quit [Disconnected by services]
boru` is now known as boru
<siraben> lispmacs[work]: hey, I wrote that! hehe
<siraben> (the Forth on TI-84+)
<siraben> cheater: I also wrote https://github.com/siraben/ti84-forth and you could expose syscalls to run TI-BASIC programs from Forth
<cheater> siraben: you did? nice
<siraben> yeah, it was a fun thing to do when I had a ton of free time in high school
zolk3ri has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
gravicappa has joined #forth
<cheater> haha cool
dave0 has joined #forth
dave0 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
sts-q has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
sts-q has joined #forth
dave0 has joined #forth
zolk3ri has joined #forth
zolk3ri has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
zolk3ri has joined #forth
xek has joined #forth
actuallybatman has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
a3f has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
a3f has joined #forth
proteusguy has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
proteusguy has joined #forth
jedb has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<mstevens> I got the arm book we were talking about before, so much delicious information
dave0 has quit [Quit: dave's not here]
jedb has joined #forth
<lispmacs> siraben: I'm really interested in trying that Forth on a real TI calculator, but I haven't yet run across a cheap TI-84+. Seems like there are piles of TI-83 to be found at local second hand stores, but no TI-84+. I've got a TI-92+ but I wasn't able to get it to work with TiLP.
<lispmacs> used to have a TI-89 Titanium which I loaded pedrom on, but one of my kids dropped it in the toliet.
<MrMobius> very sad :(
<MrMobius> TI-84 code wouldnt run on it anyway :P
Zarutian_HTC has joined #forth
koisoke has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
koisoke has joined #forth
mark4 has joined #forth
<lispmacs[work]> I did this post on configuring SPI in FlashForth the other day:
<lispmacs[work]> the next step in my plan was to try communicate with a AD9833 chip over SPI
X-Scale` has joined #forth
X-Scale has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
X-Scale` is now known as X-Scale
gravicappa has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
mecrisp has left #forth [#forth]
xek has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]