Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #11646
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| References | <4f958ae9$0$7610$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <jn82vk$h2d$1@speranza.aioe.org> <Evqdnco6j4dqIwrSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@supernews.com> <jn9ja7$f1s$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| Message-ID | <l_qdnfYVfN9iiATSnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@supernews.com> (permalink) |
| Date | 2012-04-26 04:31 -0500 |
Rod Pemberton <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> wrote: > "Andrew Haley" <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote in message > news:Evqdnco6j4dqIwrSnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@supernews.com... >> Rod Pemberton <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> wrote: > ... > >> > Later on, they merged >> > COMPILE and [COMPILE] into state-aware POSTPONE . >> >> POSTPONE isn't state-aware. > > It's true that POSTPONE is not explicitly aware of STATE. But, it > is state-aware. It's aware of words marked IMMEDIATE. In which case it is IMMEDIATE-aware; it is certainly not state-aware. >> > I saw an old discussion in c.l.f. that claimed "POSTPONE TO" is not >> > valid for ANS Forth. >> >> 'sright. > > Why? I don't see why not. It works for my ITC Forth ... Why is TO > any different when used with POSTPONE than other words? Because there are some useful implementation techniques that don't permit it. It often will work when POSTPONEd, but it's not necessary for an implementer to support it. Andrew.
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-23 19:01 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-23 17:18 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-23 19:56 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-23 20:20 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-23 14:42 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-24 07:57 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-23 22:06 -1000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2012-04-26 08:42 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-26 03:55 -0500
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-24 07:55 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-24 08:00 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" awegel@arcor.de (Alex Wegel) - 2012-04-25 14:32 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-24 10:26 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-24 19:38 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-24 11:25 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-24 22:10 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-24 16:02 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-24 13:54 -1000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-25 06:58 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-24 21:01 -1000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-24 21:40 -1000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-25 05:56 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-04-24 12:11 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-04-24 22:40 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-25 13:03 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-25 08:37 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-26 16:17 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-25 01:44 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-04-25 08:33 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-25 04:09 -0500
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-04-25 13:15 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-25 10:52 -0500
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-04-25 17:50 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-26 04:06 -0500
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-04-27 11:37 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-25 15:28 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-25 10:02 -1000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-26 01:30 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-04-26 16:48 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-26 09:27 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-26 16:42 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-04-27 00:46 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-27 05:32 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-27 05:35 -0500
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-27 04:00 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-27 20:38 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" awegel@arcor.de (Alex Wegel) - 2012-04-28 03:02 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-27 18:12 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-30 12:45 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-30 07:56 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-30 16:17 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-05-02 15:51 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-05-02 13:15 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-02 12:59 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-05-02 13:54 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-02 14:25 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-26 01:43 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-26 02:18 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-04-26 16:54 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-26 10:46 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-26 12:21 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-26 18:31 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-26 14:32 -1000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-04-27 01:50 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-27 09:10 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-27 09:47 -1000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-27 05:33 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-27 15:06 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-27 02:54 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-04-27 11:30 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-26 12:18 -0700
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-04-26 22:21 +0200
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-26 04:27 -0500
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-25 04:08 -0500
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-04-25 15:29 -0400
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-04-25 10:27 -1000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-04-26 04:31 -0500
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-26 16:35 +0000
Re: Reformulation of "STATE @ IF" Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-04-27 11:58 +0000
csiph-web