11:01:17
##forth
<pgimeno>
maybe this is widely known but I'll leave it here just in case... 36 BASE C! CAT DECIMAL 35 BASE C! . DECIMAL
11:48:27
##forth
<xentrac>
haha, nice
11:48:55
##forth
<xentrac>
btw in standard Forth you may need to use ! rather than c!
11:50:00
##forth
<xentrac>
because base yields an a-addr, not a c-addr
11:51:06
##forth
<xentrac>
in particular I'd expect you to need to use ! on Forths for big-endian chips like m68k (A Lenovo Company(tm))
13:02:41
##forth
<pgimeno>
in the Jupiter, if you use ! you overwrite the FORTH vocabulary word :)
13:43:51
##forth
<veltas>
pgimeno: lol nice
13:44:15
##forth
<veltas>
Re CAT
13:52:53
##forth
<xentrac>
haha
17:17:07
##forth
<KipIngram>
I'm somehow missing the joke here. For me this is 36:CAT . 35:CAT . and I get 15941 and 15079. What's the punch line I'm missing?
17:18:07
##forth
<GeDaMo>
D0G
17:18:48
##forth
<GeDaMo>
Input in base 36, output in base 35
17:18:56
##forth
<KipIngram>
Oh, wait - yes.
17:18:59
##forth
<KipIngram>
I misread it.
17:20:16
##forth
<KipIngram>
Ok, cool. I don't have an easy way to output in alternate bases, but I can say 36:CAT 35:D0G - . and it's 0. So, yes - haha. :-) Thanks.
17:25:53
##forth
<xentrac>
base 36 seems like a potentially useful way to store filenames
17:26:12
##forth
<xentrac>
I mean, if you're willing to accept the restriction to alphanumeric
17:35:56
##forth
<xentrac>
a 32-bit filename would be slightly over six alphanumerics
18:03:49
##forth
<KipIngram>
I quite like being able to use - and _ in my filenames, but yeah, it definitely has that potential.
18:04:16
##forth
<KipIngram>
Re: that 36/35 thing, my cat would say it's proof dogs can't spell.