Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!rt.uk.eu.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Rod Pemberton" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: CASE mis-understanding? Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 18:44:19 -0500 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 83 Message-ID: References: <2014Jan27.145730@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <52e7b833$0$24947$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> <52e7c363$0$24916$e4fe514c@dreader36.news.xs4all.nl> <66e2b3ae-f7c4-494a-bf1b-0a710763d8f2@googlegroups.com> <0733f401-121c-4072-8563-fd47c0d2a642@googlegroups.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:28192 On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:51:10 -0500, wrote: > When I release my language, it will come with documentation so people > will know what the words mean. Good. > I'm going to have a document similar the ANS-Forth document, What? Messed up? That's your perspective of the ANS document. You hate ANS but are going to produce a document just like it... Does that make any sense to you? It doesn't to me. Just saying... > I will have a core that stays the same, and various extensions that get > added on from time to time. What if the core is flawed? Keep it? That's what you just said you'd do ... How is that different from any Forth standard? We can't have a NOT which works correctly because we can't decide on what NOT means so we'll give it two other names... Doh! > This is a pretty bizarre attempt at apologizing for the ANS-Forth > failure. Eaker's CASE doesn't have any advantage in any situation. > It is just a toy. > Have you checked Google Groups to make sure your posts are propagating? If they are, do you understand that almost everyone here is ignoring you? No one has replied to any of your last half dozen posts, except one other post by me which you ignored. > The reason why people like Rod claim that C is the "god language" If you're ignoring me, why do you mention me? It's because C is better than every other language I've experienced, and that's well over a dozen. Am I supposed to say C sucks or C is just average, when it is far better than everything else so far? > (that term makes me laugh every time I read it) No one is calling Forth a "god language" around here... > [...] C's SWITCH works correctly. Which one? C has two: structured and unstructured. But, I'd say they both work correctly. > This allows C to be used as the engine for a VM. switch() allows a whole lot of things to be done with sets and ranges of values. It's mostly used because many nested IFs become tedious. > C is routinely used to write Forth interpreters True. > --- they are a lot slower than Forths written in assembly-language True. > C is not the "god language" (well, maybe if Loki is your god) --- > C is ugly, clunky and feature-poor. As compared to what exactly? BASIC, Pascal, Fortran, COBOL, Forth ... That opinion seems arbitrary, carpricious, and uninformed. > If Forth's CASE statement hadn't been screwed up by the ANS-Forth > technical committee, we would be writing C interpreters in Forth No, you wouldn't, nor would anyone else here. It only takes one word to explain why: conceit. Everyone here views Forth as the "god language" but won't say so. So, no one here would *ever* attempt to code C in Forth. Rod Pemberton