Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Rod Pemberton Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: A formal name? Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 20:25:48 -0500 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 47 Message-ID: <20170103202548.60eda8bb@_> References: <20170103001345.71d79c23@_> NNTP-Posting-Host: n4wpt9zq8xR26Ttf9mo2BA.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.13.1 (GTK+ 2.24.13; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:53722 On Mon, 2 Jan 2017 22:05:26 -1000 "Elizabeth D. Rather" wrote: > On 1/2/17 7:13 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Jan 2017 18:11:38 -0800 (PST) > > foxaudioresearch@gmail.com wrote: > >> I have been scratching my head for a name for the code words that > >> reside in the code field of a threaded Forth system. > >> > >> They are typically called DOCOL, DOCON, DOVAR etc... and we know > >> they reside in the code field address, but is there a name for > >> these words as group. > > > > Also, DODOES, DOUSER, and perhaps DOLIT. > > > > Did you mean something like "defining words" or "primitives" or > > "low-level words" or "code words" ? > > > > Did you mean something like "level 0" (fig-Forth) or > > "nucleus" (Forth-79 and Forth-83) or "core" (DPANS94)? > > > > Did you mean something like an XT? > > > > Did you mean something like ;CODE or (;CODE) ? > > They are not always separate definitions, especially in optimizing > compilers. The generic term for the code in question is "the run-time > code for [xxx]". > So, it seems that there is a subtle distinction between "primitives" and either "run-time code for [xxx]" or "run-time routines for non-primitives". It seems that "primitives" are only single-use run-time code, while the "doers", or "generic actions", can be used repeatedly. Is that correct? If so, that's an interesting distinction. I've been referring to both as "primitives". The "doers", while they are *used* multiple times in my low-level code (17 DOVAR, 7 DOCON, 11 DOCOL as ENTER), their run-time routines are *implemented* as code only once, just like the code for primitives with single-use run-time code, e.g., DUP DROP ADD SUB, etc. Rod Pemberton