Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: minforth Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: 0 vs. translate-none Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2025 17:46:54 +0200 Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: <2025Sep17.185305@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <20250920103435.00002fbe@tin.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net 3VWfTPTmtJtqpwgp6K5QqwFadcS2Kc3V9tWfeKxCgIWLKlLrhZ Cancel-Lock: sha1:kIxN0HhSyiJgACbV5iMycKKHgNI= sha256:FvNRTbVIW9wChIdrGh59ldqj8CT+SD8ozO9Mg41C0H4= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:134185 Am 21.09.2025 um 14:44 schrieb albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl: > In article , > minforth wrote: >> Am 21.09.2025 um 10:37 schrieb albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl: >> >>> All this is accomplised by a PREFIX flag (compare IMMEDIATE) >>> and a provision that advances the interpreter pointer by >>> the length of the prefixes, not by the length of the word passed >>> to it. >>> >>> It is believable that the system presented above is more powerful, >>> but I love to see examples what it can do that warrant the >>> complexity. Also I love to see if the examples can't be >>> done with my simpler setup. >>> Recently I presented the Roman number prefix. How does >>> that look in the recognizer presented. >> >> FWIW I also use suffixes for recognizers: >> let M be a matrix >> M´ auto-transposed >> M~ auto-inverted >> > The ability to use suffixes doesn't contribute necessarily to > power. It adds confusion and difficulty to parse. > Try it > Program a suffix aided recognizer for Roman numbers: > MMXIIX:R > YMMV but in my world it is more important to have better readability of matrix equations, than to minimise Forth parser pain. ;-)