Path: nntp.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: zbigniew2011@gmail.com (LIT)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Parsing =?UTF-8?B?dGltZXN0YW1wcz8=?=
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 09:33:40 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <20baae7dd561db60967a5937d2b59d9a@www.novabbs.com>
References: <1f433fabcb4d053d16cbc098dedc6c370608ac01@i2pn2.org> <f3fbac3a6e57ccf7465fff66180ac9e1@www.novabbs.com> <2025Jun23.071834@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <a004d0f4acf945e054db77d86a4544fc@www.novabbs.com> <nnd$0d7645ea$11a210a3@2cd6ffa4d9a3008a> <4a4c38c99d22d97314ed5750af38430d@www.novabbs.com> <765bd244e1368b5691f18c748102470e8de1a30d@i2pn2.org> <nnd$0deda869$2559e613@c251414cde7edbe7> <103ilab$225q0$1@paganini.bofh.team> <cda70ea80eb98069a3060f95503d0853@www.novabbs.com> <2025Jun29.171314@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <96f3b6d94af924cf1468a2cced37966d@www.novabbs.com> <d5ff6c298dff84dabc278ac1a28087d55126645e@i2pn2.org> <0cd5e9d5959101c1efa68a2d6d630e23@www.novabbs.com> <069f09501a3c6fcade18fdf83925d835514b42cc@i2pn2.org> <44b5f13fd49d8ddbd572ae583379d124@www.novabbs.com> <21113c70c36a86f0fd4c74c8d11d0947528ba70f@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2700528"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="ovTHZ/VLht/KDF1nKqB7PmGhjiyfUdv/DKd8kGKFjRY";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 8e58c9b6d1da98b6162b84d03d2307a6516add15
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$gY1mUKK5bFMQEzred71nbOcTQDtgULX0DZNbn6VNcdwkVbOfuH3uu
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0

>> In a way this statement can be extended to the
>> use of local variables. Still, as I said, it's
>> allowed. No need for "too ideological" approach
>> if that works for the programmer, neither for
>> insisting on "canonical" ways etc.
>
> While many a stack op can be simulated using PICK and ROLL (hence
> CS-PICK
> CS-ROLL) I'm unaware of anyone using them in place of.  If stack ops are
> "canonical" it's because nobody has found a more efficient way of
> programming
> a stack computer.  Recognizing this as the fact and the reality, a
> programmer
> that's serious will deal with reality and not chase after ideology which
> is
> the province of thought.

The stack ops THEMSELVES may be, in a way,
"canonical" — but not solving "each and every"
programming task using them "no-matter-what", IMHO.

--