X-Received: by 10.224.172.68 with SMTP id k4mr23259543qaz.1.1375667590012; Sun, 04 Aug 2013 18:53:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.49.95.233 with SMTP id dn9mr453479qeb.35.1375667589995; Sun, 04 Aug 2013 18:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!fx3no772748qab.0!news-out.google.com!a13ni157qay.0!nntp.google.com!fx3no772745qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 18:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4195327b-9905-49a1-92ea-43c12af645e9@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=204.14.77.98; posting-account=6GCGIQoAAAAyO8IjR_VTwqiqLwx0Q_G8
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.14.77.98
References: <87wqomga80.fsf@pestilenz.org> <26e3733d-d76f-4a4a-8b30-0f888f9bb318@googlegroups.com> <ksbqgt$jgh$1@dont-email.me> <87txjpjais.fsf@necronomicon.my.domain> <2013Jul22.174305@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <f2ba9703-0fec-42bf-a25a-d56ab5cc089d@googlegroups.com> <87fvv3c9xt.fsf@pestilenz.org> <912b40eb-9435-4b53-a32f-3fd868fdedad@googlegroups.com> <877ggddbb7.fsf@pestilenz.org> <rKmdnecYscprum_MnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@supernews.com> <dd0b840e-962d-4e42-89bd-69aab331fb52@googlegroups.com> <87mwp39dna.fsf@pestilenz.org> <4195327b-9905-49a1-92ea-43c12af645e9@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <d2bfc149-e706-437d-b546-2fc0ed25311d@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Request for comments on a first forth program
From: Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 01:53:10 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:24985

On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 9:05:37 PM UTC-4, hughag...@yahoo.com wrote:
> All in all, I'm not too impressed with your confidence in knowing how to =
write definer words, when all you know is CREATE DOES>, which I consider to=
 be an obsolete 1970s-vintage aspect of Forth

You mean discovered and hashed out when every clock cycle mattered.

There's a little overhead there, but the simplicity is worth it. Complexity=
's hidden costs are universally underestimated.

I looked in your "novice package" again (thank goodness 2012 came and went =
without me having to machine a slide rule to replace my EMP-fried computer)=
 but I don't see how :NAME addresses the inefficiencies of CREATE DOES>. If=
 DOES> worked well when chip features were measured in tens of microns, how=
 bad can it be now?