Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Rod Pemberton" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Making Forth official Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 04:35:02 -0500 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 56 Message-ID: References: <528e0962$0$26909$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> <8MCdnWCDddifsRPPnZ2dnUVZ8jOdnZ2d@bt.com> <85a9gwlx7u.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> <5290e683$0$3200$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: CNsg4fVcCsvs3UaOgZtQCw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:26922 On Sat, 23 Nov 2013 12:31:47 -0500, Albert van der Horst wrote: > In article , > Mark wrote: >> "Lars Brinkhoff" wrote in message >> news:85a9gwlx7u.fsf@junk.nocrew.org... >>> Mark wrote: >>>> Albert van der Horst wrote: >>>> > With this added to virtually all editors, .frt will become the de >>>> > facto extension for Forth source files under Linux which is >>>> > important since Linux has attained world domination. >>>> Personally I have always quite liked .4th as being suitably >>>> descriptive and to the point. >>> >>> These Forth file extensions are used on GitHub, ordered from most >>> popular to least: >>> >>> 1. fs >>> 2. fth >>> 3. f >>> 4. 4th >>> 5. fr >>> 6. frt >>> 7. forth >>> 8. 4 >>> >> >> The adoption of .4th and .forth seems to make a great deal >> of sense to me. > > Me too. Fortunately I'm hacky about source control. > I'll just make symbolic links from euler344.frt,v > to euler344.4th,v if this pans out. > You guys could also checked Wotsit's to make sure your choices are not in use: http://www.wotsit.org/list.asp?al=F I bet a bunch of you forgot about Wotsit's... You could also check Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_file_formats http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIME_type Some of you will notice the second link is for MIME types... I think it would be good to not collide on those as well. I would think the main priority, if there are no extension collisions above, is to prevent choosing an extension that Microsoft will use someday, or perhaps Google. Rod Pemberton