Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.datemas.de!rt.uk.eu.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: quick review of <BUILDS and CREATE history
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:37:54 -0500
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <op.w9yu1gm65zc71u@localhost>
References: <op.w9x40in85zc71u@localhost> <zqqdnYChjNguw0HPnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@supernews.com> <QfadnSaNy6ZL7kHPnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@supernews.com>
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:27965

On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 19:54:43 -0500, Elizabeth D. Rather  
<erather@forth.com> wrote:
> On 1/19/14 1:24 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Rod Pemberton <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> wrote:

>>> Next, :NONAME was created to essentially do what the early limited
>>> CREATE did but without writing a name into the dictionary header.
>>
>> No, that's completely wrong.
>
> :NONAME is, as Andrew points out, completely unrelated to this topic.  
> We're talking about defining various kinds of data objects with  
> specialized behaviors; :NONAME only constructs a headerless colon  
> definition and returns its xt. Totally different topic altogether.
>

So, defining CREATE in terms of : and ; and DOVAR
and also defining : in terms of :NONAME and WORD and CMOVE is
not possible?  Odd...

If :NONAME did not return an xt, what does it do differently from
CREATE other than not install a name?

I.e., it appears to me that :NONAME works much like HEADER, enough
so that it can be a low-level replacement for it.  In which case,
since CREATE is defined in terms of : and that can be defined in
terms of :NONAME, then :NONAME should be useable to construct
<BUILDS since it's defined in terms of CREATE or a word like
VARIABLE or CONSTANT which are, typically.

Make sense?  Or, still completely wrong?


Rod Pemberton