00:14 <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

00:17 <cheater> MrMobius: that's still two separate langs

00:28 <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

00:49 <cheater> i don't want two modes

00:50 <cheater> just something with some features from basic, and some features from forth, that's all

00:50 <cheater> i don't know why everyone's all like "oh you want two languages at the same time" no i don't

00:50 <cheater> :)

01:18 <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

01:18 <cheater> what do you mean by "checked"?

01:18 <cheater> do you mean tokenized?

01:18 <cheater> lispmacs[work] ^

01:20 <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

01:20 <lispmacs[work]> Forth, you throw a word at it and it does that. If it fails trying, it throws an error

01:21 <cheater> oh right

01:21 <cheater> yeah, interesting

01:21 <cheater> i mean you don't have to have both at the same time, right

01:21 <lispmacs[work]> constructs in forth where you seem to have a syntax are actually just a trick of switching between interpreter and compiler mode

01:21 <cheater> you can choose and match

01:21 <cheater> oh

01:21 <cheater> i had no idea

01:22 <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

01:29 <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 +)

01:30 <lispmacs[work]> I haven't used BASIC in like two decades...

01:33 <lispmacs[work]> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntax_(programming_languages)

01:35 <lispmacs[work]> good ol' qbasic

01:35 <lispmacs[work]> and whatever it was running on my Apple IIe

01:55 <MrMobius> cheater, youd have to give an example of what this hypothetical forth/basic combination would look like then

01:55 <cheater> i'm wondering myself

01:56 <cheater> what if instead of a stack we had a syntax tree

01:57 <cheater> then PRINT would just be a node within the syntax tree, with one hole to fill in using a thing that's printable

01:57 <cheater> similar to how you put stuff on the stack in forth, you'd put stuff on the tree with this thing

02:38 <siraben> lispmacs[work]: hey, I wrote that! hehe

02:39 <siraben> (the Forth on TI-84+)

02:39 <siraben> cheater: I also wrote https://github.com/siraben/ti84-forth and you could expose syscalls to run TI-BASIC programs from Forth

02:45 <cheater> siraben: you did? nice

02:46 <siraben> yeah, it was a fun thing to do when I had a ton of free time in high school

03:36 <cheater> haha cool

13:29 <mstevens> I got the arm book we were talking about before, so much delicious information

15:57 <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.

15:58 <lispmacs> used to have a TI-89 Titanium which I loaded pedrom on, but one of my kids dropped it in the toliet.

17:13 <MrMobius> very sad :(

17:13 <MrMobius> TI-84 code wouldnt run on it anyway :P

19:04 <lispmacs[work]> I did this post on configuring SPI in FlashForth the other day:

19:04 <lispmacs[work]> https://librehacker.com/2021/01/30/flashforth-spi-328p/

19:04 <lispmacs[work]> the next step in my plan was to try communicate with a AD9833 chip over SPI