Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention

From	"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention
Date	2016-07-07 13:01 +1000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<nlkggp$7mc$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<0bfcdb36-eaf0-4634-8820-049911494e85@googlegroups.com><c1ddd988-4b71-4d7e-9776-69ce1c495e77@googlegroups.com><nlcmq2$nmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <37c74d57-5eac-44c5-b5db-8ff916abdd14@googlegroups.com><nldr5j$hd2$1@gioia.aioe.org> <389e8f65-9c89-4694-9bd5-ab5360d4d18b@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org wrote:
> HAA writes:
> ...
> > We don't change human language simply
> to satisfy an academic principle.  IMO neither should we do it for Forth.
>
> In this case, we have the opportunity to impose consistency because there is only one
> word in the standard following the convention DU<x>.

Consistency is not making changes willy-nilly.  DU< has been standard
for over 30 years.  UD. never has been and there are no doubles in the
Standard that begin with UD .

The reason I wouldn't put UD. in the Standard isn't because the name is
inconsistent with DU< but because it's largely useless.  Forth applications
frequently need more than the simple typed numeric output offered by
Standards.  Most Forth systems have things like (D.) and if yours doesn't
they're easy to create and Forth expects that you will.  IMO posting a library
of output routines would serve Forth better than filling the Standard with
limited-use functions.

Thread

RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2016-07-02 07:25 -0700
  Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-07-02 10:01 -0500
  Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention ruvim.pinka@gmail.com - 2016-07-02 12:43 -0700
    Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 01:05 -0400
      Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention ruvim.pinka@gmail.com - 2016-07-03 00:31 -0700
        Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 11:54 -0400
    Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-07-05 00:19 +1000
      Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2016-07-04 07:37 -0700
        Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-07-07 13:01 +1000
          Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2016-07-09 08:40 -0700
            Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-07-10 18:23 +1000
              Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2016-07-10 08:27 -0700
    Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-07-04 13:59 +1000
      Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2016-07-03 22:42 -0700
    Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2016-07-03 21:09 -0700
      Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention ruvim.pinka@gmail.com - 2016-07-10 20:37 -0700
      Re: RfD: Unsigned Double Words Naming Convention ruvim.pinka@gmail.com - 2016-07-10 21:07 -0700

csiph-web