Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeder2.ecngs.de!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 14:17:37 -0600
From: Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 20:17:37 +0000
Message-ID: <2012110820173759604-chrishinsley@gmailcom>
References: <2012110713421835115-chrishinsley@gmailcom> <509bb9a2$0$6999$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net> <2012110814115169871-chrishinsley@gmailcom> <2012110814312086525-chrishinsley@gmailcom> <2012110814515560672-chrishinsley@gmailcom> <509bf899$0$19587$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net> <2012110820040689990-chrishinsley@gmailcom>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: Genral advise and comments on callback style words
User-Agent: Unison/2.1.9
Lines: 45
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-BPqOSWz++wGLOBE3VcDn2LPEaGKGise+fJzVmY0x7FCHiGmGVykd+BHb66VpE3I9DaTXYdC6riQ5h5i!qpwfWn+u0Kazy1/c118Y4nfuuORABrqhkr96MZ8pFE+zJ2rDMusVjy6X5xEFo7lA9uUMXEw=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2825
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:17181

On 2012-11-08 20:04:06 +0000, Chris Hinsley said:

> On 2012-11-08 18:23:21 +0000, Josh Grams said:
> 
>> Chris Hinsley wrote: <2012110814515560672-chrishinsley@gmailcom>
>>> On 2012-11-08 14:31:20 +0000, Chris Hinsley said:
>>>>> Josh Grams wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> : LISTHEAD-ENUMERATE-FORWARDS ( u xt lh -- ln | 0 )
>>>>>> 	TUCK  SWAP 2>R
>>>>>> 	LISTHEAD-GET-HEAD BEGIN
>>>>>> 		2DUP LISTNODE-GET-SUCC
>>>>>> 	DUP WHILE
>>>>>> 		2R@ EXECUTE
>>>>>> 	?DUP UNTIL ELSE NIP THEN
>>>>>> 	NIP NIP 2R> 2DROP ;
>>>> 
>>>> Err, I'm not sure that works! You are skipping the first node.
>> 
>> Yeah, sorry; I thought that's what your code was doing; see my response
>> to your first reply to mine.
>> 
>>>> Isn't the 2DUP also blowing up the stack with an extra copy of the
>>>> original LH each time ?
>>> 
>>> And it's not passing the user value into the callback at all ?
>> 
>> In this case, EXECUTE is ( u ln lh xt -- ln | 0 ), right?  So the 2DUP
>> provides two of those four items, and the 2R@ provides the other two.
>> 
>> : LISTHEAD-ENUMERATE-FORWARDS ( u xt lh -- ln | 0 )
>> 	TUCK  SWAP 2>R  LISTHEAD-GET-HEAD
>> 	BEGIN DUP WHILE  ( u ln )  ( R: lh xt )
>> 		2DUP LISTNODE-GET-SUCC 2SWAP
>> 		2R@ EXECUTE
>> 	?DUP UNTIL THEN ( u ln ln|0 ) NIP NIP 2R> 2DROP ;
>> 
>> --Josh

Ah, no that crashes ! Reason is that you end up processing the end of 
list marker, ie the bottom two thirds of the listheader as if it was an 
actual node ! Nice try ! ;)

Chris