Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ruvim <ruvim.pinka@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: single-xt approach in the standard
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 15:59:48 +0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <vcbqvk$3etuk$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vcbn5e$3etuk$1@dont-email.me>
 <d85ac3d9a2e6f7af161993b33b10c890@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 13:59:49 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bb6be25696ff9ecdef0cd10a258ad90b";
	logging-data="3635156"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+jNmS7mLmiArbp4k2oJtr/"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pLNu0/WBGJxDKdKpqkbig0Ae6ok=
In-Reply-To: <d85ac3d9a2e6f7af161993b33b10c890@www.novabbs.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 1683

On 2024-09-17 15:20, minforth wrote:
> I would like to see an "officially recognized" standard reference
> system, speed and number of xt's per word are of no importance.
> 
> Are you planning to make one?

I think, having the single standard reference implementation is a big 
step back in Forth standardization process. Because implementation 
details of the particular implementation will be used as requirements.

I think, the standard conformance test suite is enough.

For illustrative purposes, we can have several different implementations 
of Forth in Forth.


--
Ruvim