Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: D>F and S>F  first draft
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 17:26:54 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <87mvu2hns1.fsf@nightsong.com>
References: <n2qss7$2mo$1@dont-email.me> <n2rql8$52b$1@speranza.aioe.org> <d8695637-e8a3-4766-bcc0-43250aa8b2ef@googlegroups.com> <n2tkq7$hle$1@speranza.aioe.org> <n2trmi$1lc$1@dont-email.me> <n30h8e$c1$1@speranza.aioe.org> <87h9kci02j.fsf@nightsong.com> <n330lo$5jg$1@speranza.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="560a36ee31cc4bcf69e115b311f0cc5c"; logging-data="13269"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1847PfUUnDp2fw1fHWjCoVl"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0ff7xtUOe9olEfVYweaJGLfZCUs= sha1:Do8+TNusBa3fc5Olb+f/pDLrBGk=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:43714

"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> writes:
>> > I see no practical difference between 'rounding' to some
>> > system-dependent fp value and an ambiguous condition.
> Ambiguous condition ... means the implementor can choose whatever
> action he feels is appropriate...  Users then have the choice of going
> with that system or choosing another if they don't like the behavior.

You're saying there's no practical difference between a) requiring a
standard system to do something sane, and b) letting it do something
crazy while still calling itself standard, and telling the user to pick
a different system if they want sanity?  I think Elizabeth gave the
example that in Colorforth, OR means exclusive or.  That's fine in the
greater scheme of things, but I think it's best for it to be considered
nonstandard.