Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: vandys@vsta.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Which standard?
Date: 27 Apr 2012 23:34:53 GMT
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <a00ootF2doU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <30794f7f396fa9ad7ec52f034288c527@dizum.com> <4f6e69ee$0$6866$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl> <op.wbpv1mhysu5d0p@david> <2012Mar26.110424@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <m1i7s5.mvv@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> <jl4m35$uqf$1@news.albasani.net> <YNydnZ7vN6BzaejSnZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@supernews.com> <jm19ue$nre$1@news.albasani.net> <KdednWxB75Pl0xnSnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@supernews.com> <jne9la$b67$1@news.albasani.net> <a7f03522-9d5b-41f3-bea7-3f8fbcb4f157@36g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
X-Trace: individual.net hO3TjkC6KgyJWNRo7kaeYQD9t1xmyYssSTyReT91k6aHXHdAL0
X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:F2/T36y0+j3WCM67IQ+T1dzzKkk=
User-Agent: tin/1.8.3-20070201 ("Scotasay") (UNIX) (Linux/2.6.32-41-generic-pae (i686))
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:11702

BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> wrote:
> There is also the common case of ( value | FALSE ), for linked list
> next item entries, for string lengths, for return status.

Whenever I try to use that technique, I end up being hosed by the "value"
ending up needing to be 0.  I always now use ( value TRUE | FALSE ).
Even when I am "sure" value can never be 0....

-- 
Andy Valencia
Home page: http://www.vsta.org/andy/
To contact me: http://www.vsta.org/contact/andy.html