Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #11572

Re: Status of OO in Forth?

Show all headers | View raw

Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/12 10:52 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Doug Hoffman<glidedog@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> On 4/8/12 3:17 PM, Mark Wills wrote:
>>>> On Apr 8, 5:29 pm, an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> "A. K."<a...@nospam.org>   writes:
>>>>>> I am just curious whether there is a standardization proposal "under
>>>>>> way"
>>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>>>>
>>>>>> or had it been abandoned completely?
>>>>>
>>>>> No.  There are some people who want a standard OO system for Forth.
>>>
>>>> I'd like to see one, too. One that doesn't rely on the somewhat hacky
>>>> 'vocabulary sealing' technique.
>>>
>>> Actually, it's pretty easy to write an objects extension that uses no
>>> vocabularies (wordlists) at all, anywhere, if you think using
>>> vocabularies is 'hacky'.  It's straightforward if you are willing to
>>> accept a message-object ordering.
>>
>> Why does it require a message-object ordering?  There's no need for
>> compile-time parsing: all a system has to do is find a handler for the
>> method and jump to that handler.
> 
> It's just one way to do it, not a requirement.  Now you have
> mentioned another way sans wordlists.  Do you have a link for such
> an extension?

No.  I'm still thinking.  Will write it up if I get time.

Andrew.

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Status of OO in Forth? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-04-24 08:55 -0400
  Re: Status of OO in Forth? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-24 09:52 -0500
    Re: Status of OO in Forth? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-04-24 10:58 -0400
      Re: Status of OO in Forth? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-24 11:43 -0500
        Re: Status of OO in Forth? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-04-25 08:41 -0400
          Re: Status of OO in Forth? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-25 07:52 -0500
            Re: Status of OO in Forth? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-04-25 09:47 -0400
              Re: Status of OO in Forth? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-25 10:37 -0500
                Re: Status of OO in Forth? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-04-25 12:18 -0400
                Re: Status of OO in Forth? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-25 11:39 -0500
          Re: Status of OO in Forth? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-25 15:16 +0000
            Re: Status of OO in Forth? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-04-25 08:33 -0700
            Re: Status of OO in Forth? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-04-25 11:52 -0400
              Re: Status of OO in Forth? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-26 16:26 +0000
                Re: Status of OO in Forth? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-26 13:09 -0700
                Re: Status of OO in Forth? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-26 14:20 -1000
                Re: Status of OO in Forth? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-27 09:21 +0000
                Re: Status of OO in Forth? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-04-26 21:42 -0400
    Re: Status of OO in Forth? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-24 16:47 +0000
      Re: Status of OO in Forth? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-24 12:02 -0500

csiph-web