Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vctukd$32tfb$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!3.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, 24 Sep 2024 12:52:29 +0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 46 Message-ID: <vctukd$32tfb$1@dont-email.me> References: <vcts54$34hmb$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 10:52:30 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="26d220beb36d605f1d6f3332be578ae5"; logging-data="3241451"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+KozU65lLTa3SF7yGu/tmK" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:1MJ6mKSLbcpQW9sRtTOPKyQKhXE= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <vcts54$34hmb$1@dont-email.me> Bytes: 2214 On 2024-09-24 12:10, Gerry Jackson wrote: > On 23/09/2024 18:02, Anton Ertl wrote: >> mhx@iae.nl (mhx) writes: >>> On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 8:36:10 +0000,albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote: >>> >>>> In article<vcq1e5$25spg$7@dont-email.me>, >>>> Ruvim<ruvim.pinka@gmail.com> wrote: >>> [..] >>>>> 1 constant a >>>>> 1 constant b >>>>> ' a ' b = . >> ... >>> Why? 'a' and 'b' are user defined words, '=' is a standard word, >>> and 'true' is the expected outcome. >> Are you sure? >> >> [~:152648] iforth >> FORTH> 1 constant a ok >> FORTH> 1 constant b ok >> FORTH> ' a ' b = . 0 ok >> >> I actually know of no system that outputs -1. >> >> - anton > > I know it's different but: > > 1 constant a > synonym b a > ' a ' b = . \ displayed -1 in 5 out of 6 Forths I just tried, including > GForth. > > Comparing xt's is unsafe > The same xt means the same execution semantics and nothing more. But the same execution semantics can be identified by different xt-s. Thus, from two different xt-s one cannot say whether they identify different execution semantics or the same execution semantics. -- Ruvim