My newest version of N-O is Linux v2.4.3 -- no too old --
and shows:
/home/oberon/docu/Coco.Report.ps 07.02.2000 18:47:29 199238
where the *.ps file shows '%!PS-Adobe-2.0'.
I've never been able to view this !PS-Adobe-2.0' thing, and I guess
others have also wasted a lot of effort in trying ?!
After great efforts I got a viewable version from Linz > ftp.
---------
I imagine a possible 'hello world' minimal test, could be
<Integer> <-- store/push integer
{ ( "+" <-- Operator :="+"
| "-" ) <-- Operator :="-"
<Integer> <-- Get Int2; Print(integer, Operator, Int2)
}.
where the RHS semantic/actions are commands exported from
specially built modules, which in the example/s are CR*.* .
Apparently the components needed are:
* syntax in EBNF
* semantics/action matching corresponding tokens/terminals,
in format: <SyntaxToken> (. <Call to actionCommand/s> .)
* Module/s to 'do' required actions.
>From the big 1993 CR.ATG example file, I can't see how to
structure a minimalist test.
Can anyone help/advise ?
Can we put a gentle HOW2 on Edgar's wiki for others to test/use ?
---------- RE: PIC (was Re. Staapl
>>OTOH I'm confused that he writes: ----------
>> Conditional statements have the form shown at the left
>> and explained in terms of conventional notation to
>> the right.
>>
>> [cond -> StatSeq] IF cond THEN Statseq END
RE: PIC (was Re. Staapl, Joerg wrote:
> I just browsed through Wirth's papers:
> 1) http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Articles/Miscellaneous/PICL.pdf
> 2)/Miscellaneous/PICLcompiler.pdf
>
> The short syntax "[ Cond -> StatSeq ]" mentioned in 2) was
> eventually replaced by the long syntax "IF Cond THEN StatSeq END".
>
> But even in 1) you find small "left overs" of this syntax:
> * In 1) chap 1 you'll find "symbol = + | - ... | ->". The syntactic
> token "->" is foreseen.
> * In chapter 5, the "->" is used in "GuardedStat = Condition -> StatSeq"
> But GuardedStat is not used.
>
> The two papers are not consistent and just not complete (yet!).
> They seem to be in "draft" state.
Yes ! They're dated 2008.
I hope his PICL is available.
The old chips are still available.
It's strange that/if Prof Wirth retired long ago, he's still designing
teaching projects for ETHZ.
I wonder if/how I could join the project ?
Thanks,
== Chris Glur.
Coco.Report.ps is an Adobe Postscript file. There is a free Postscript viewer for Linux
called Ghostscript. You can find a more detailed user manual in PDF format here:
http://www.ssw.uni-linz.ac.at/coco/
----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Glur <easlab(a)absamail.co.za>
To: oberon(a)lists.inf.ethz.ch
Cc: crglur(a)gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 9:55:52 AM
Subject: [Oberon] Where's Coco's 'hello world' ?
My newest version of N-O is Linux v2.4.3 -- no too old --
and shows:
/home/oberon/docu/Coco.Report.ps 07.02.2000 18:47:29 199238
where the *.ps file shows '%!PS-Adobe-2.0'.
I've never been able to view this !PS-Adobe-2.0' thing, and I guess
others have also wasted a lot of effort in trying ?!
After great efforts I got a viewable version from Linz > ftp.
---------
I imagine a possible 'hello world' minimal test, could be
<Integer> <-- store/push integer
{ ( "+" <-- Operator :="+"
| "-" ) <-- Operator :="-"
<Integer> <-- Get Int2; Print(integer, Operator, Int2)
}.
where the RHS semantic/actions are commands exported from
specially built modules, which in the example/s are CR*.* .
Apparently the components needed are:
* syntax in EBNF
* semantics/action matching corresponding tokens/terminals,
in format: <SyntaxToken> (. <Call to actionCommand/s> .)
* Module/s to 'do' required actions.
>From the big 1993 CR.ATG example file, I can't see how to
structure a minimalist test.
Can anyone help/advise ?
Can we put a gentle HOW2 on Edgar's wiki for others to test/use ?
---------- RE: PIC (was Re. Staapl
>>OTOH I'm confused that he writes: ----------
>> Conditional statements have the form shown at the left
>> and explained in terms of conventional notation to
>> the right.
>>
>> [cond -> StatSeq] IF cond THEN Statseq END
RE: PIC (was Re. Staapl, Joerg wrote:
> I just browsed through Wirth's papers:
> 1) http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Articles/Miscellaneous/PICL.pdf
> 2)/Miscellaneous/PICLcompiler.pdf
>
> The short syntax "[ Cond -> StatSeq ]" mentioned in 2) was
> eventually replaced by the long syntax "IF Cond THEN StatSeq END".
>
> But even in 1) you find small "left overs" of this syntax:
> * In 1) chap 1 you'll find "symbol = + | - ... | ->". The syntactic
> token "->" is foreseen.
> * In chapter 5, the "->" is used in "GuardedStat = Condition -> StatSeq"
> But GuardedStat is not used.
>
> The two papers are not consistent and just not complete (yet!).
> They seem to be in "draft" state.
Yes ! They're dated 2008.
I hope his PICL is available.
The old chips are still available.
It's strange that/if Prof Wirth retired long ago, he's still designing
teaching projects for ETHZ.
I wonder if/how I could join the project ?
Thanks,
== Chris Glur.
--
Oberon(a)lists.inf.ethz.ch mailing list for ETH Oberon and related systems
https://lists.inf.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/oberon
> >
> > The whole ideas of pic: minimal dil-devices; seems to
> > have morphed to absurdity - like upgrading a
> > wheel-barrow to a locomotive !
> >
Chris Burrows wrote:-
> Not for everybody - read about Wirth's recent PIC-related work here:
>
> http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/Articles/Miscellaneous/index.html
Wow ! The value of serendipit/dy.
This thread only got here because I wrongly failed to update my
EditKeys.Definitions ^ 's
default field from oberon(a)lists.inf.ethz.ch
Yes, Wirth has stuck with the original small DIL version.
I hope I can still buy them.
Usually they start with a '2 cylinder version' and later you can only
buy the '8 cylinder version'.
It's beautiful how Wirth has used eg.
!x.4 == set bit 4 of variable x
!~s.3 == clear bit 3 of variable s
?~B.6 == wait for bit 6 of [variable B eg.] the acknowledgement-signal
Compare this snappy syntax to the 'set-based' nightmare of x86-native.
OTOH I'm confused that he writes: ----------
> Conditional statements have the form shown at the left and explained in
> terms of conventional notation to the right.
>
> [cond -> StatSeq] IF cond THEN Statseq END
> [cond -> StatSeq0 |* StatSeq1 ] IF cond THEN Statseq0 ELSE StatSeq1 END
> [cond0 -> StatSeq0 | cond1 -> StatSeq1]
> IF cond0 THEN Statseq0 ELSIF cond1 THEN StatSeq1END
>
> Repetitive statements have the form:
>
> {cond -> StatSeq} WHILE cond DO Statseq END
> {cond0 -> StatSeq0 | cond1 -> StatSeq1}
> WHILE cond0 DO Statseq0 ELSIF cond1 DO StatSeq1 END
-------------
Which syntax WE don't like as much as OUR familiar:
> MODULE Conditions;
> INT x, y, z, w; SET s; BOOL b;
> BEGIN
> IF x = y THEN z := 0 END ;
> IF x = y & y # z & z >= w THEN z := 0 END ;
> IF x < y OR y <= z OR z > w THEN z := 0 END
> END Conditions.
---------------
which he writes in his same *.pdf explanation.
Aubrey.McIntosh wrote:
]Interesting. Has anyone downloaded the compiler?
No I can't find it even with:
http://www.google.com/search?submit=Google+Search&q=PICL
+site:www.inf.ethz.ch
If someone points me to the compiler, I'll do a simplified
report-back on some compile-test runs, because I've got the
hardware here.
Thanks.
== Chris Glur
Tom Schouten wrote:
> The Staapl project has come to a point where it is ready for public
> scrutiny.
>
> http://zwizwa.be/staapl
>
> Staapl is a collection of abstractions for (meta)programming
> microcontrollers from within PLT Scheme. The core of the system is a
> programmable code generator structured around a functional
> concatenative macro language. On top of this it includes a syntax
> frontend for creating Forth-style languages, a backend code generator
> for Microchip's PIC18 microcontroller architecture, and interaction
> tools for shortening the edit-compile-test cycle.
This is a non-trivial project, which could be worth following.
But: engineering =cost benefit analysis ?
Some of these points could go into the FAQ.
I started with picforth.
But while I was waiting for Dosemu to mature, so that I
could better not have to use a DOS-box to program the
chips, the technology moved beyond me.
The whole ideas of pic: minimal dil-devices; seems to
have morphed to absurdity - like upgrading a
wheel-barrow to a locomotive !
Q - before I d/l the 37K *.tar.gz,
must I particularly get plt-scheme too ?
I've got a [presumably standard] scheme already installed
and tested and convenient.
I use oberon, not C, and getting into CVS/darc could be a
can-of-worms.
Q - obviously there's linux executables, or source +
compilation-scripts available ?
We all want minimal committment initially ?
Thanks,
== Chris Glur.
