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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #1659

Re: STATE

Show all headers | View raw

"BruceMcF" <agila61@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:13ec1787-cf0d-416e-998f-98b0552fd333@w21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 29, 1:56 pm, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@noavailemail.cmm>
> wrote:
> > I don't know if it's moot. E.g., the version of the fig-Forth spec.
that's
> > available as text, says TIB returns an address:
>
> If you are looking to fig-Forth, you are arguing that it *is* a moot
> point, since fig-Forth code would assume that STATE names a variable.
>

I don't know if it's moot whether or not one treats a low-use, or
minimal-value-change, variable as a constant.  E.g., spec. says one thing,
but common implementation differs.  Which do you follow?  Do you chose to
comply with the spec.?  Do you chose to not break common code?  I.e., not
moot.  What if such a situation were present with ANSI Forth?  People place
a strong emphasis on ANSI correctness, but what would one do if common code
usage was different?  You could not - in this theoretical situation - comply
with the spec. and not break code.


Rod Pemberton

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

Thread

STATE MarkWills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-27 12:41 -0700
  Re: STATE Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-04-27 13:04 -0700
    Re: STATE MarkWills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-27 13:13 -0700
      Re: STATE Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-04-27 13:45 -0700
    Re: STATE "P.M.Lawrence" <pml540114@gmail.com> - 2011-04-28 03:00 -0700
      Re: STATE Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-04-28 04:09 -0700
        Re: STATE Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-04-28 04:10 -0700
  Re: STATE Micke <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2011-04-27 13:20 -0700
    Re: STATE MarkWills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-27 13:26 -0700
      Re: STATE MarkWills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-27 13:30 -0700
      Re: STATE Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-27 11:13 -1000
        Re: STATE Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-27 17:17 -1000
        Re: STATE Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-04-29 06:14 -0500
          Re: STATE Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-29 08:47 -1000
            Re: STATE MarkWills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-29 14:07 -0700
  Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-27 19:22 -0700
  Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-30 08:18 -0700
  Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-30 08:26 -0700
  Re: STATE "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-04-30 03:24 -0400
  Re: STATE stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2011-04-30 11:41 +0000
  Re: STATE stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2011-04-30 11:53 +0000
    Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-30 08:48 -0700
  Re: STATE anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-04-28 08:59 +0000
    Re: STATE Brad <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2011-04-28 08:01 -0700
      Re: STATE Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-04-28 12:16 -0500
        Re: STATE Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-28 09:47 -1000
      Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-28 15:56 -0700
        Re: STATE Brad <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2011-04-29 07:49 -0700
          Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-29 11:47 -0700
      Re: STATE anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-04-29 17:30 +0000
    Re: STATE Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-04-28 17:47 +0000
      Re: STATE Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-28 09:50 -1000
  Re: STATE "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-04-28 16:32 -0400
    Re: STATE MarkWills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-29 02:11 -0700
      Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-29 07:24 -0700
      Re: STATE "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-04-29 13:56 -0400
        Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-29 11:44 -0700
          Re: STATE "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-04-29 15:45 -0400
            Re: STATE Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-29 10:22 -1000
            Re: STATE BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-29 13:31 -0700
        Re: STATE Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-29 09:07 -1000

csiph-web