Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Krishna Myneni <krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: 0 SET-ORDER why?
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2024 13:31:36 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <v5s8a8$ksnb$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v5fjkr$1p13i$1@dont-email.me>
 <2024Jun26.094910@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <v5gs5j$23lka$2@dont-email.me>
 <2024Jun28.175045@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <v5p51t$3utd9$2@dont-email.me>
 <6680c10c$1@news.ausics.net> <v5s019$jbd6$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5s0d3$jbd6$2@dont-email.me>
 <bf66af7e3abb6d49d1e6ff2935802477@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2024 20:31:37 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="28e027d9b804f541c185bf948998100f";
	logging-data="684779"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18SXfhuR1IyIYtpLkfsPOOc"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:vJUby88sd/YkIM9snZTfQ9+9gOs=
In-Reply-To: <bf66af7e3abb6d49d1e6ff2935802477@www.novabbs.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 1937

On 6/30/24 12:38, minforth wrote:
> FORTH-WORDLIST 1 SET-ORDER should bring you "back to life".
> IOW the question is whether FORTH-WORDLIST and SET-ORDER
> should be findable even when the search-order is empty.
> Probably classified as "implementation-defined option".

The minimum search order contains FORTH-WORDLIST and SET-ORDER per the 
standard. The question is whether or not the standard should actually 
guarantee that this is always true.

It seems nonsensical to say there are zero wordlists in the search 
order, but FORTH-WORDLIST and SET-ORDER are still findable.

--
KM