| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<1acbb08dc9aec99e221532a95f93170fa7dbd839@i2pn2.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: THROW codes and ambiguous conditions Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2025 13:10:36 +1000 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <1acbb08dc9aec99e221532a95f93170fa7dbd839@i2pn2.org> References: <f827ba6fc80427f3ce0317835bd8ae47a4445e07@i2pn2.org> <101q6ik$10htc$1@dont-email.me> <nnd$7d6e16de$78c9f5b5@7d0d4c583323cd1e> <101u12p$23a54$1@dont-email.me> <nnd$470dff8c$593b4849@31279367604044df> <101vl9b$2fvp7$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2025 03:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="3623097"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="XPw7UV90Iy7EOhY4YuUXhpdoEf5Vz7K+BsxA/Cx8bVc"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird In-Reply-To: <101vl9b$2fvp7$1@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-GB X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 2340 Lines: 22 On 7/06/2025 7:06 am, sean@conman.org wrote: > ... > A goal of my Forth system was to only have standard Forth words. You trust the Standard. Why? The Standard dates backs to 1977 starting out as a list of words pulled from Kitt Peak Forth. If KPF didn't have (.) etc well that was just too bad. The point being nobody sat down and systematically designed the standard (or forth) ground up. It was adhoc. It's always been adhoc. Moore has changed his mind numerous times. What one sees in the Standard is a snapshot of 1977. Naturally if there were issues with standard words, committees would attempt to fix them. But a rational synthesis of Forth, the standard is not. One finds that out quickly enough when one starts writing applications. It's no coincidence commercial forths have always gone beyond what the standard offered and that there are no 'standard forth applications' to speak of. Even small forths can do better than what the standard offers by simply factoring out tools already present e.g. (.) (D.) (U.) /CHAR >CHAR >DIGIT HELD MU* MU/MOD TRIM UNNEST I'd rather have these than all the support for wordlists DEFER and other stuff the standard and folks have obsessed over.