Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2025 07:50:49 GMT Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien Lines: 24 Message-ID: <2025Feb1.085049@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> References: <49736c0ec0e34ca5d67f4e0d6e8cbe2a080e38ab@i2pn2.org> Injection-Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2025 09:11:58 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e73d87433ea6af5c12faf5c290261c8e"; logging-data="2216"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Sk79Sm4kx79z2UWF2ipoA" Cancel-Lock: sha1:FwQLOGteBadFZLx7C4dqyOx8Bhc= X-newsreader: xrn 10.11 Bytes: 2251 dxf writes: >If I use locals I'm more likely to >use the ANS notation. I notice Forth Inc does too - perhaps why they were so >adverse to conceding to { } . The reason why Forth, Inc. argued against { } is that they support an existing code base that uses { } for comments; they use { } comments extensively in SwiftForth, and their customers use it, too. They voted for {: :}, so they obviously don't have a problem with the ordering of locals in {: :} (which is the same as for { }). Using WHERE LOCALS| in SwiftForth x64-Linux 4.0.0-RC89 only brings up the definition of LOCALS|, but no uses. "WHERE {:" brings up the definition and 5 uses of "{:", all with more than one local; so they obviously do not have a problem with the ordering of locals in {: :}. Can you elaborate on what you have noticed? - anton -- M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html New standard: https://forth-standard.org/ EuroForth 2023 proceedings: http://www.euroforth.org/ef23/papers/ EuroForth 2024 proceedings: http://www.euroforth.org/ef24/papers/