Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SeattleRobotics] Re: Forth for Robots (from Loki's first steps)

Expand Messages
  • Jon Hylands
    On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 07:55:32 -0000, David Wyland ... Smalltalk has the same feature, although it gets this by way of the garbage
    Message 1 of 314 , Feb 1, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 07:55:32 -0000, "David Wyland" <dcwyland@...>
      wrote:

      > Almost all the other languages use equations: C=A+B. We learned this
      > in algebra and it is the first thing you learn in all the Fortran
      > derivatives, such as C, Basic, Pascal, Python, etc. However, C=A+B
      > implies *named* variables A, B and C. So we *generate* named variables
      > and then have to keep track of them. *All* variables have to have
      > names so you can use them in an equation. The names are an artifact of
      > the use of equations. Equations breed names.

      Smalltalk has the same feature, although it gets this by way of the garbage
      collector rather than a stack, but it definitely gives the same resulting
      boost in productivity - you don't have to name or even maintain references
      to objects that are created in the middle of operations.

      I smile when I watch C programmers work in Smalltalk, because they want to
      hold onto every little object by naming and referencing it.

      Later,
      Jon

      --------------------------------------------------------------
      Jon Hylands Jon@... http://www.huv.com/jon

      Project: Micro Raptor (Small Biped Velociraptor Robot)
      http://www.huv.com/blog
    • Randy M. Dumse
      Dave Hyland had asked about the compession of code, and I had mentioned the LLE project. Larry Forsley, who did it, wrote me he was back from vacation, so I
      Message 314 of 314 , Feb 12, 2008
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Dave Hyland had asked about the compession of code, and I had
        mentioned the LLE project. Larry Forsley, who did it, wrote me
        he was back from vacation, so I asked him about the details. He
        sent an extended, but rather interesting reply. In particular
        the last few paragraphs talk about "hacking" in the sense
        research was done by interactive testing with tweaked constants
        and hand adjustments, yeilded to verification of a patented
        process of upconversion of photons. Dave, this is my basis to
        say on a large project, not only the object produced will be
        smaller, the source often compresses much more than most would
        believe. I had suggested a 5:1 reduction, which people found
        difficult to believe. Larry here documents an actual case ~100:1
        reduction. Hope you enjoy the read, I did.:



        The laser control power conditioning system that I built in the
        late '70s was originally written in Fortran whose source code,
        specification and documentation filled a shelf full of 3 inch 3
        ring binders, probably close to 20 in all, which with tapes and
        backups and things filled a good 6 - 8 foot shelf. The Forth
        code, including the operating system source code fit in one 1
        inch binder and the power conditioning source code was about 10
        pages, or 30 Forth blocks.

        The Fortran system also included a microcoded Hewlett Packard
        21MX minicomputer that ran a relational description language
        (RDL) I had devised prior to finding out about Forth in 1976 or
        so. It was an interpretive system that stored spatial and
        temporal relationships of components, sort of Smalltalk-like
        (which I didn't learn about until the mid-80s). General
        Electric Trident Missile Systems built the system to my and
        another engineer's specifications.

        However, GE signed up to deliver the system in August of 1977,
        thinking that would be fine for meeting our September, 1977 DOE
        milestone. Unfortunately, the milestone required an operating
        laser, not just the power conditioning system.

        One of our EE staff had gone up to Ottawa to a semiconductor
        plant auction and bought two HP2114 computers: replete with 16K
        words of core memory! My first inhouse Forth system went on
        these, and, Ken Hardwick of the mainframe University computing
        center, put a full multi-tasking, multi-user operating system,
        URTH, or University of Rochester Forth on them. Ken had the
        prescient to make the first high level version of ;code, that,
        like Chuck, he also called ;: later to be renamed DOES>.

        I took the system and put a full laser amplifier testbed
        together and with one computer in Rochester and one at Raytheon
        in Massachusetts, we "rang out" all of the laser amplifiers.

        In the early spring of 1977, after I realized that GE wouldn't
        give us the 3 months we needed to run the laser under automated
        control, I commandeered Dan Gardner from GE (who hated Forth)
        and we wrote a complete 6 beam laser power conditioning control
        system. I think we started in April and were done by June.
        That gave June, July and August to test the laser, while waiting
        for the "real" laser control system to come on line. The test
        only needed 4 beams, but the first experimental laser would be
        the 6 beam Zeta, so I figured, what the hell!

        Naturally, the top down build to the specs approach, so
        "apropos" to the military and nuclear submarines, didn't work
        too well with a small University embarked on building the
        world's largest laser for fusion studies. As we wrote the Forth
        code and found out how the laser really worked, bit sense or
        control polarities were wrong, bit assignments were wrong, muxes
        were wrong, etc, we fed that over to the software group so they
        could correct the spec.

        I always liked the idea of an "executable spec": e.g. the
        software.

        At the end of the day, it was decided by Moshe Lubin, the
        director of LLE, that since we'd spent a half million dollars
        and probably 5 man-years building the "real" software, we'd
        better use it. I fought this ridiculousness, but abstained at
        the end.

        Instead, the following systems came up in Forth:

        24 beam laser alignment system, primarily written by my students
        over a couple classes and two programmers, running on an LSI
        11/23 with 256Kbytes of RAM, floppy disk and a 10 MB RL01 hard
        drive, multiple color consoles, 24 tasks, etc. Lawrence
        Livermore ran a 20 beam system on a VAX-780 networked through a
        PDP-11/70 and hundreds of LSI 11/23 computers, each one
        responsible for 4 mirror control systems in the laser. We
        could align and shoot every 30 minutes. Livermore could do the
        same every 2 hours.

        There was probably 2 man-years of effort in LLE Laser control
        system and easily 100+ man years in the Livermore system. I
        discussed this with their engineers one time, and found that
        probably 20% of their effort went into building a sufficiently
        robust RS-232 based communications infrastructure to support the
        communicating tasks, synchronizing them, etc, in the
        pre-Ethernet era.



        Glass Development Laser (GDL, also known as the God Damn Laser)
        power conditioning and safety interlocks for multiple
        laboratories.

        Optical Multichannel Analyzer (OMA) on the back of various
        streak cameras

        The GDL and OMA systems performance and flexibility allowed
        Stephen Craxton, a British theoretical physicist, to verify his
        2 wave mixing theory using "detuned" crystals to get 100%
        conversion of infrared photons to ultraviolet photons (2 red ->
        1 green, 1 red and 1 green -> UV). This saved laser fusion in
        the mid-80's, and gained LLE a significant patent using two
        birefringent crystals each "detuned" about the extraordinary
        axis of rotation. This is the standard method through out the
        world of building high power lasers for fusion and other
        studies, as well as smaller systems for a variety of purposes.

        Bob Boni, Steve Craxton, a GDL operator and occasionally me,
        would run GDL nights when no one else was around to rotate the
        crystal pairs, under Forth control, fire the laser, under Forth
        control, operate the streak camera OMA, under Forth Control, and
        within seconds of a shot know where we were on Steve's plots.
        Then, we'd recycle the laser rotate the crystals or adjust the
        laser power, and fire again. We literally stepped right through
        Steve's curves, nailing them with experimental data.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.