Path: csiph.com!optima2.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: The meaning of xt in Forth-94
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 18:02:10 -0400
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <op.x0515wqtyfako5@localhost>
References: <2e398151-3bb9-4827-8b25-2065117703f1@googlegroups.com> <15782669-963a-457f-957a-ac045492d54b@googlegroups.com> <55894f83.422822145@news.eternal-september.org> <2015Jun23.184750@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <51153cf4-0911-4bc1-826e-34676cdb68e2@googlegroups.com> <2015Jun28.162625@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <87si9butvz.fsf@nightsong.com> <KfqdnRydZJTJRQ3InZ2dnUU7-eGdnZ2d@supernews.com> <87a8viuq3m.fsf@nightsong.com> <2015Jun30.094837@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <87lhezosbg.fsf@nightsong.com> <2015Jul2.144953@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
NNTP-Posting-Host: n4wpt9zq8xR26Ttf9mo2BA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; 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:40257

On Thu, 02 Jul 2015 08:49:53 -0400, Anton Ertl
<anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
> Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes:
>> anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:

>>>> Another is use state...  I don't know whether the above is better or
>>>> worse than making {: into a parsing word, in terms of forthiness.
>>> Worse: Existing user-defined text interpreters would not work.
>>
>> What facilities for user-defined text interpreters exist now?
>> Somehow I missed that.
>
> REFILL WORD FIND STATE EXECUTE COMPILE, >NUMBER LITERAL
>
> E.g., as outlined in A.6.2.0945:
>
> ...                                              ( c-addr )
> FIND ?DUP IF                                     ( xt +-1 )
>   STATE @ IF                                     ( xt +-1 )
>      0> IF EXECUTE ELSE COMPILE,            THEN ( ??? )
>   ELSE                                           ( xt +-1 )
>      DROP EXECUTE                                ( ??? )
>   THEN
> ELSE                                             ( c-addr )
>   ( whatever you do for an undefined word )
> THEN
> ...

Did you just post a word with STATE in it?  Looks like it.

In your opinion, shouldn't the inner interpreter *not* be
STATE-smart too?

Elsehwere in this thread, you said:

> For FIND, the main use seems to be in user-defined text interpreters,
> so I made FIND work for that; the result is that the xt returned by
> FIND depends on STATE.

If you're going to excise STATE-smart words, shouldn't this be
consistent, i.e., done everywhere?   I.e., if you can't actually
eliminate the use of the word STATE everywhere, what is the point
of attempting to do so, in part?


Rod Pemberton

-- 
Tolerance and socialism attracts intolerance and terrorism.  See:
France, United Kingdom, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands, ...