User talk:Wmb@firmworks.com: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Questions from Forth Lesson 1) |
(→Questions from Forth Lesson 1: was an unsigned comment) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
*Is there a forth which works with Sugar, i.e as a Sugar activity? |
*Is there a forth which works with Sugar, i.e as a Sugar activity? |
||
**No. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 10:18, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
**No. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 10:18, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
||
--86.135.8.160 |
|||
Revision as of 15:23, 15 November 2007
recurse, yum
Hi! In lesson 4, I might have only used the definition of factorial that used the word 'recurse', and just skipped 'recursive'. 'recurse' is ever so much nicer, don't you think?
<Mitch> I don't have a strong opinion about recurse vs. recursive. Both get the job done.
Thanks for the awesome intro to forth!
<Mitch> You're welcome, glad you like it.
Questions from Forth Lesson 1
Lesson 1 does not have enough information:
- What OLPC capabilities are accessible through forth?
- Which capabilities are not accessible?
- Is there a forth which works with Sugar, i.e as a Sugar activity?
- No. --IanOsgood 10:18, 15 November 2007 (EST)
--86.135.8.160