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: dxf <dxforth@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Parsing timestamps?
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 14:48:11 +1000
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <cc98bb3dffab9c5b6232794b908f75be77bb05de@i2pn2.org>
References: <1f433fabcb4d053d16cbc098dedc6c370608ac01@i2pn2.org>
 <bdc732e87e38233e9e23f254b2326cf2@www.novabbs.com>
 <nnd$1a4144e5$43cad09f@b57c0b5013a1f2ab>
 <6ea4ccd1cb6ae8c828144444fe51fea9@www.novabbs.com>
 <70a3014f99baf5e43b32e1320d7b8cd482be04c1@i2pn2.org>
 <bfc6dc31af5bcbe4b4b0a2ccba8167e3@www.novabbs.com>
 <a8647abe1ce54c9c55c558f571761214a7c9d0f0@i2pn2.org>
 <61ff078b04e03c7b65b6dff98f58b80b@www.novabbs.com>
 <nnd$15d62a05$79f87aeb@2d18b2c67eb1f6e0>
 <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>
 <d82938e7a98984ff66ded29fed23e5594c228aea@i2pn2.org>
 <87h6041iue.fsf@nightsong.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 04:48:15 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2070207"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="XPw7UV90Iy7EOhY4YuUXhpdoEf5Vz7K+BsxA/Cx8bVc";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-GB
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <87h6041iue.fsf@nightsong.com>

On 25/06/2025 3:38 pm, Paul Rubin wrote:
> dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> writes:
>> Forth forces an average programmer to adopt a level of organisation
>> sooner than a locals- based language.  I suspect forthers that promote
>> locals are well aware forth is readable and maintainable but are
>> pursuing personal agendas of style which requires implying the
>> opposite.
> 
> IDK, I've seen some unreadable Forth code that was written by experts.
> Whether locals could have helped, I don't know.

Define 'unreadable'.  In general I don't need to understand the nitty
gritty of a routine.  But should I and no stack commentary exists, I've
no objections to creating it.  It's par for the course in Forth.  If it
bugged me I wouldn't be doing Forth.