home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   comp.lang.forth      Forth programmers eat a lot of Bratwurst      117,927 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 116,424 of 117,927   
   Anton Ertl to albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl   
   Re: Application benchmark suite appbench   
   21 Apr 24 11:00:30   
   
   From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at   
      
   albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl writes:   
   >In article <2024Apr20.170147@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>,   
   >Anton Ertl  wrote:   
   >   
   >>iForth-5.1-mini does not occur in the table, because not a single   
   >>benchmark runs on it, because this system does not support relative   
   >>file names, not even in the working-directory-relative way that other   
   >>commercial systems support (at least in my installation, and my   
   >>impression when I asked about that is that this is the way Marcel   
   >>Hendrix intends it to be).   
   >   
   >Are working directory relative file names mentionned in the standard?   
      
   Forth-94 and Forth-2012 do not give any guarantees with respect to   
   file names.  I.e., a system is allowed to produce, e.g., an ior of -37   
   (File I/O exception) when you call OPEN-FILE with every name, and   
   produce an Error -37 on every INCLUDE.  I wanted to change this, but   
   one person actively opposed my proposals.  I tried to cut down my   
   proposal to a minimum (just defining directory separators and valid   
   file names), but the opposition was still there, while the support   
   that existed for my larger proposal evaporated.   
      
   So this is not about standards requirements, this is about whether a   
   system behaves in a useful way.  Working-directory-relative filenames   
   are a low bar, and appbench has been designed to cope with Forth   
   systems that provide only that.  In particular, the shell scripts for   
   running the benchmarks always "cd" into the directory of the   
   individual benchmark, because otherwise the INCLUDEs in the benchmarks   
   would fail on VFX, SwiftForth, and iforth-2.1.   
      
   But iForth-5.1-mini does not meet even this low bar:   
      
   [c8:~/nfstmp/gforth-amd64:103150] /bin/pwd   
   /nfs/nfstmp/anton/gforth-amd64   
   [c8:~/nfstmp/gforth-amd64:103151] ls -l siev.fs   
   -rw-r--r-- 1 anton 29015 572 Feb 13  2023 siev.fs   
   [c8:~/nfstmp/gforth-amd64:103152] iforth   
   AMD Ryzen 7 5800X 8-Core Processor x16 , TICKS-GET uses os time &   
   PROCESSOR-CLOC   
   K 3000Mhz   
     Do: < n TO PROCESSOR-CLOCK RECALIBRATE>   
      
   FORTH> include siev.fs   
   No such file or directory `siev.fs'   
   Error -37   
   can't open ?   
      
   At least using an absolute file name works:   
      
   FORTH> include /nfs/nfstmp/anton/gforth-amd64/siev.fs  ok   
      
   When I asked about that a while ago, IIRC the answer was that I should   
   always be using absolute file names in iForth.  As a result, I don't   
   run any Forth programs consisting of more than one file on iForth (and   
   often not Forth programs consisting of one file; if it's more than I   
   usually cut and paste, iForth is too cumbersome).   
      
   - anton   
   --   
   M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html   
   comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html   
        New standard: https://forth-standard.org/   
      EuroForth 2023: https://euro.theforth.net/2023   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca