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: Semantics as observable behavior
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:36:11 +0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <vcr5pc$25spg$10@dont-email.me>
References: <vcbn5e$3etuk$1@dont-email.me>
 <1a3ebf77c1ed8926d455a268e1309fe0@www.novabbs.com>
 <vcbuog$3etuk$3@dont-email.me> <66ee34a2$1@news.ausics.net>
 <vcmbf2$1ifml$1@dont-email.me> <66ef7dc7$1@news.ausics.net>
 <vcpi98$25spg$1@dont-email.me> <2024Sep22.191342@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
 <vcpsiu$25spg$4@dont-email.me> <2024Sep22.230424@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
 <vcq448$25spg$8@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 09:36:13 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="33b085eef38ab766afb617aef8ec1273";
	logging-data="2290480"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+o8Qbsjs4+0nzX4vhZl2Ft"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qg+X9+CTH8S9MCK6kq2Qu0j2Id8=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vcq448$25spg$8@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2790

On 2024-09-23 02:01, Ruvim wrote:
> On 2024-09-23 01:04, Anton Ertl wrote:
>> Ruvim <ruvim.pinka@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On 2024-09-22 21:13, Anton Ertl wrote:
>>>>
>>>> : bar state @ ; immediate
>>>>
> [...]
>>>> The interpretation semantics of BAR are to push the contents of STATE
>>>> on the data stack.
>>>
>>> I think, we should use the black box model — specify what can be
>>> observed. And according to what can be observed, the interpretation
>>> semantics of this word are to push zero on the data stack.
>>
>> No.
>>
>> : [execute] execute ; immediate
>> s" bar" find-name name>interpret ] [execute] [ . \ prints -1
> 
> Could you please formulate: how to programmatically perform the behavior 
> that can be observed when the Forth text interpreter encounters the name 
> of your word "bar" in interpretation state?
> 
> And how to do it in the general case (for any defined word)?


I also want to address these questions to everyone.

Can you suggest one ore more standard-compliant ways to exhibit the same 
behavior that is observed when the Forth text interpreter encounters the 
name of the word "bar" (defined above) in interpretation state?

You may provide quotations (or anonymous definitions), execution of 
which exhibits that behavior.

And also, if you can, suggest such ways for any word "foo", regardless 
how it is defined.



--
Ruvim