Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #36658
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? |
| Date | 2015-02-18 16:44 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <mc2ff9$fe1$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <2015Feb17.135426@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <slrnme72k9.7sh.empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@Ferrycy.localdomain> <2015Feb18.123119@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <54e490ca$0$21336$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> <2015Feb18.150022@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
on 18/02/2015 14:00:23, wrote: > albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) writes: >>While we are at it, has some one ever removed the wordlist >>to which definitions are added (CURRENT I think) from the >>search order, to arrive at a special effect in compilation? > > With SET-CURRENT you don't need to put it in the search order in the > first place. With DEFINITIONS you have to, but then you may be using > vocabularies that overwrite the top of the search order, so no need to > explicitly remove it, either. I.e.: > > vocabulary assembler assembler definitions forth > >>Has anybody a use case for this, i.e. a situation where >>it is essential that CURRENT and CONTEXT are different? > > Some assemblers define words that are spelled exactly like standard > Forth words, e.g., AND XOR OR. And you may want to use the Forth > words while defining the assembler words, so you may want the > ASSEMBLER wordlist to be current, but not in the search order. The x86 assembler CMOVE (conditional MOV on flag EQ) caused me untold grief when I implemented it; until I realised that it was being redefined in the Forth wordlist rather than defined in the assembler wordlist.
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-17 00:46 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-17 09:33 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-17 10:08 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-17 11:07 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-02-17 12:54 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-17 18:38 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-02-18 11:31 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-18 13:16 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-02-18 14:00 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-18 16:44 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? november.nihal@gmail.com - 2015-02-17 07:13 -0800
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-02-17 08:21 -1000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-17 18:43 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-02-17 11:59 -1000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-17 18:30 -0800
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2015-02-18 04:01 -0800
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-18 18:13 -0800
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-02-28 11:35 +1100
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-18 12:34 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-02-18 12:28 +0000
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 08:49 -0800
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 09:04 -0800
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 10:17 -0800
Re: Search order - why usually two times "Forth"? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2015-02-18 10:20 -0800
csiph-web