Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.ecp.fr!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Rod Pemberton" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Recommendation of a Forth to embed in C Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 01:43:30 -0400 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 44 Message-ID: References: <85ca46a5-03d8-41ad-ab7e-8e5c3b781e48@googlegroups.com> <88c99e6b-9fb4-45fb-a724-eb03a673ceec@googlegroups.com> <53547407$0$25056$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: CNsg4fVcCsvs3UaOgZtQCw.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:29901 On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 02:16:58 -0400, Alex McDonald wrote: > on 22/04/2014 17:23:25, "Rod Pemberton" wrote: >> On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 19:19:19 -0400, Alex McDonald >> wrote: >>> on 22/04/2014 00:29:57, "Rod Pemberton" wrote: >>>> On Mon, 21 Apr 2014 21:26:48 -0400, Alex McDonald >>>> wrote: >>>>> on 21/04/2014 17:25:35, "Rod Pemberton" wrote: >>>>>> Bob Bemer and Hugh McGregor Ross created ASCII and EBCDIC. They >>>>>> defined a character of exactly 8-bits. >>>>> >>>>> ASCII is, by definition, a 7 bit code. Bemer suggested an 8 bit >>>>> character in 1959, but it was not adopted for ASCII. >>>>> >>>> I accept that the non-extended ASCII characters only need 7-bits >>>> for their representation. But, I don't accept that ASCII is only >>>> 7-bits and not 8-bits. >>>> >>>> My recollection is that ANSI X3.4-1986 defined *both* ASCII and >>>> extended ASCII. Of course, the last time I read that standard >>>> was over two decades ago ... So, AIR, extended ASCII are 8-bit >>>> characters with the high bit set. AIR, the extended ASCII >>>> character set was intended for platform specific, graphics, >>>> and math symbols. >>> >>> ISO/IEC 8859, an 8 bit extended ASCII was ratified in 1998. US-ASCII or >>> ANSI X3.4-1986 was specifically 7 bits, and there is no mention of 8 >>> bit encodings. >> >> Please cite. I found mention in two academic sources which say that >> the ASCII standard defines extended ASCII. >> > > http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2006/06388-review-incits4.pdf Thank you for confirming what I stated. If you had read that, or even remotely skimmed it, I *seriously* doubt you would've posted that link in support of your argument. Rod Pemberton