Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: dxf <dxforth@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Standard compliance for systems
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2024 12:02:33 +1100
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <4cf28211cfe08cc8d6c03a37baeee2514e7dfd23@i2pn2.org>
References: <vcbn5e$3etuk$1@dont-email.me>
 <b781b7565e7b2c60363014dacde27099ac877449@i2pn2.org>
 <0af0a53d0f8be577ddf48666fc4c9b24@www.novabbs.com>
 <8b00c0b3ab87b7154adc00d7fe89bde6817367b5@i2pn2.org>
 <nnd$0fee3dda$66549014@f1313470e4d61a36>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2024 01:02:37 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3850327"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="XPw7UV90Iy7EOhY4YuUXhpdoEf5Vz7K+BsxA/Cx8bVc";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <nnd$0fee3dda$66549014@f1313470e4d61a36>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2346
Lines: 27

On 24/11/2024 12:09 am, albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote:
> In article <8b00c0b3ab87b7154adc00d7fe89bde6817367b5@i2pn2.org>,
> dxf  <dxforth@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 22/11/2024 9:11 pm, minforth wrote:
>>> Must be bad weather and boring where you live. ;-)
>>
>> You're welcome :)
>>
>>> If you have a lot of strings to juggle, treat yourself
>>> to a string stack. Forth is all about flexibility, right?
>>
>> A relative never cleaned their email inbox.  For the last
>> month any message sent bounced with 'mailbox full'.  Their
>> solution was to pay for a bigger inbox.
> 
> If you set aside 1 Gbyte of a 8 Gbyte for a circular string
> stack, why don't you do like me? Permanently allocate all
> strings in the dictionary. This is a so called memory leak,
> but this is not so bad compared to wasting 1 Gbyte up front.
> Works well together with MARKER, I'd see better than a circular
> string set.

For systems that use a circular buffer to store temporary strings
the size is typically 1 or 2 Kb.  That's reflected in the rather
vague spec for S" .  AFAICS the 2012 decision was more about
implementing common practice than needing common practice.  IMO
Forth-94 got the balance right for both S" and floating point stack.