Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP

From	"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP
Date	2016-10-31 19:11 +1100
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<nv6uiq$gh0$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(6 earlier) <2016Oct22.154921@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <nujjrn$579$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2016Oct24.131526@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <nv0ps1$tte$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2016Oct29.184434@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>

Show all headers | View raw

Anton Ertl wrote:
> ...
> The introduction of CHARS and CHAR+ did not happen for informative
> purposes,

How do you know?  It can't be ruled out.

> but for abstracting the character size in the same way that
> CELLS and CELL+ abstracts cell size (which became necessary due to the
> move from 16-bit systems towards larger cell sizes).  The reasons why
> they thought that we would need to abstract the character size were:
>
> 1) Nybble-addressed machines, where 8-bit chars would take 2 aus.
>
> 2) Unicode, which around 1990 looked to be a 2-byte fixed-width
> character set (UCS-2).

I'm sure these were issues.  The practical consequence of Forth-94
introducing mnemonics for the two most used datatypes in Forth was
portability and readability.  Forth had been dogged by complaints of
'write-only' code and ANS helped address that.

> Anyway, if you feel the need to use these unnecessary abstractions in
> your programs, they are still there, and nobody has proposed removing
> them, so you are free to use these words to write what you consider
> professional, readable, clear, consistent and informative code.

The fact is CHAR+ CHARS are necessary and must remain in CORE so
systems can read/write portable code.  200x needs to explain to users
what it hopes to gain by allowing coding such as this:

: nextword \ ad -- ad'
  dup c@ + 1+ ;

Forth-94 would require it be written:

: nextword \ ad -- ad'
  dup c@ 1+ CHARS + ;

It's not just the addition of CHARS that's different, the logic has changed
for the better.

(no offence to the original author intended)

Thread

1 /STRING vs SNIP foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-10-18 19:31 -0700
  Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 07:24 +0300
  Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-19 07:52 +0000
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 16:58 -0700
      Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-21 16:01 +1000
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-21 00:51 -0700
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-21 00:57 -0700
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 05:20 -0700
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-22 00:25 +1000
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 09:13 -0700
              Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-21 16:24 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-21 20:06 +0200
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 14:19 -0700
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-22 13:46 +1000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-10-22 11:34 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-22 13:49 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-24 11:15 +1000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-24 03:01 +0200
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-24 13:29 +1000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-24 11:15 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-24 19:44 -0700
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-29 11:17 +1000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-10-29 04:09 -0500
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-29 16:44 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-29 17:11 -0700
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-31 19:11 +1100
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-31 08:47 +0000
      Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 03:49 -0700
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-22 20:02 -0700
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-22 20:13 -0700
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 21:09 -0700
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-23 18:36 -0700
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-10-27 14:07 +0100
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-27 19:12 -0700
              Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-10-28 19:39 +0100
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-28 20:26 -0700
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-10-26 19:52 -0700
      Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-27 09:42 +0000
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-10-27 06:46 -0700
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-10-28 07:31 +0000
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-10-28 11:33 +0100
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP jasmijn Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> - 2016-10-28 04:09 -0700
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-10-28 12:41 +0000
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-28 16:50 +0000
              Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-10-28 10:59 -0700
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-29 10:17 +0000
  Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-19 20:19 +1000
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 05:12 -0700
  1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 04:07 -0700
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-21 15:50 +0200
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-25 16:38 -0700
      Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2016-10-26 10:50 -0400
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2016-10-26 10:53 -0400
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-26 17:33 +0200
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2016-10-27 10:16 -0400
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 17:01 -0400
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 17:00 +0200
  Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 12:25 +0200

csiph-web