Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #16864
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: well formed flag ? |
| Date | 2012-10-31 14:57 +0000 |
| Organization | Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien |
| Message-ID | <2012Oct31.155754@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <jsSdnfKOD5hcGBPNnZ2dnUVZ8iqdnZ2d@supernews.com> <7xwqy9l2qq.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> <y8ydnWtcz6zyIRPNnZ2dnUVZ7tGdnZ2d@supernews.com> <7xhapcgf8f.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> <2270264.4FCLagfS2b@sunwukong.fritz.box> |
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> writes:
>Languages without arbitrary pointers like traditional Fortran have much
>stricter rules for unaliased memories.
Fortran has one particular such rule: The compiler may pass parameters
by reference, but a program must not pass the same array to a
functioon through two parameters.
That rule is not present in other languages without arbitrary
pointers, such as Algol, Pascal or Java. In particular, Jensen's
Device (Algol 60) relies on two parameters referencing the same
variable through name calling.
Conversely, one can have a rule like the Fortran rule in a language
with arbitrary pointers like Forth, or add arbitrary pointers to
Fortran. The generalization of Fortrans parameter rule would be: two
parameters would not be allowed to point to the same contiguous region
(in Forth terminology). I think that it would be a bad idea to add
such a rule to Forth, though, even if we would not have to care about
backwards compatibility.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
EuroForth 2012: http://www.euroforth.org/ef12/
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 15:59 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 16:03 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 08:33 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 09:06 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 09:26 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 20:33 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 20:38 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 12:52 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 21:01 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-10-27 22:18 +0200
Re: well formed flag ? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-28 04:19 -0400
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 17:44 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-27 14:52 -0400
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 20:06 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 19:25 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 19:33 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-27 15:08 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 00:53 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 09:31 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-10-27 19:21 +0200
Re: well formed flag ? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 10:33 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-10-27 22:21 +0200
Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-28 12:33 +1100
Re: well formed flag ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-27 15:46 -1000
Re: well formed flag ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-27 08:54 -1000
Re: well formed flag ? Chris Hinsley <chris.hinsley@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 20:11 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-28 11:05 +1100
Re: well formed flag ? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-28 11:53 +0000
Re: well formed flag ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-28 14:17 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-10-28 16:59 +0200
Re: well formed flag ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-28 18:37 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-29 23:46 +1100
Re: well formed flag ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-29 08:33 -0500
Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-29 08:25 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-29 12:27 -0500
Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-30 08:18 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-30 10:33 -0500
Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-30 08:48 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-30 11:45 -0500
Re: well formed flag ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-30 20:10 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-30 15:10 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-30 18:28 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-11-02 05:28 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 08:13 -0700
Re: well formed flag ? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-30 12:50 -1000
Re: well formed flag ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-31 14:57 +0000
Re: well formed flag ? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-31 17:58 +0100
Re: well formed flag ? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-31 17:39 +0000
Re: well formed flag ? David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2012-11-16 23:21 -0500
Aliasing (was: well formed flag ?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-31 14:03 +0000
Re: well formed flag ? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 12:06 -0400
Re: well formed flag ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 09:31 -0700
Aliases (was: well formed flag ?) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-31 17:02 +0000
Re: well formed flag ? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 20:06 -0400
Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-29 23:47 +1100
Re: well formed flag ? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-30 18:02 +0000
Re: well formed flag ? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-31 11:44 +1100
Re: well formed flag ? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-31 09:25 +0000
csiph-web