Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "HAA" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Would ?EXIT work in all ANS-Forth systems? Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 00:32:50 +1000 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: <13e6c647-fd9a-4d77-89e3-2cc977f3bd5b@googlegroups.com><1cca60ee-6f98-443d-8466-d7efbea8724f@googlegroups.com> <86inl266tx.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: b6zfoPpsQkkvuaZxVabCPg.user.gioia.aioe.org X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:59373 Alex wrote: > On 5/16/2017 09:42, Gerry Jackson wrote: > > On 16/05/2017 01:24, HAA wrote: > >> Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > >>> HAA wrote: > >>>> It expresses a functionality which at the time was implemented through > >>>> R> DROP. For all I know ANS TC simply forgot to consider this use > >>>> in its > >>>> R> deliberations. > >>> > >>> Isn't it the case that the 1994 ANS explicitly spells out that return > >>> addresses may not be accessible at all by R>? > >> > >> Exactly. > > > > So they didn't forget about it, they chose to make it non-standard. > > > > And gave us CATCH and THROW, a much better & portable solution that > allows you to mark a place and return to it without any return stack > dependencies. Why more don't use it is a little mystifying. I'm happy to give credit to ANS when they get something right. But misapplying what they've provided is something only a fan will do.