Re: DON'T

From	"Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: DON'T
Date	2014-05-31 17:58 -0400
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<op.xgqvbbpq6zenlw@localhost> (permalink)
References	<81a8b0d8-66e0-45db-93f3-016b98bb997f@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, 31 May 2014 13:49:25 -0400, Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com>  
wrote:

> There is a Forth word called DO, but there is not a Forth word called  
> DON'T.  I was playing with the idea of how could there be a Forth word  
> called DON'T.  Then I had a funny idea.
>
> Suppose that you had an array of behaviors for a robot or something  
> else.  Each item in the array is a vector to a behavior.  The word DON'T  
> would set some of these vectors to NOOP.  Then when the code which needs  
> to step through the array to execute some of the vectors, finds a NOOP,  
> it will execute the NOOP instead and as a result, nothing will happen  
> then.
>
> For what it's worth.
>

But, your DON'T is _not_ related in any way to Forth's DO ...

Or, what's wrong with a DON'T ... LOOP ?

I think hear some laughter, but I'm not joking ...

Perhaps, DON'T could define a range to skip in a LOOP.
E.g., modified "Starting Forth" example for DO ... LOOP:

10 0 3 7 DON'T  I .  LOOP

0 1 2 7 8 9

It might be implementable with a conditional +LOOP when I is 3 ... ?

I have no serious thoughts on the order of 3 7 is 3 7 or 7 3 or
whether 3 or 7 are inclusive or exclusive.  Your choice.

Also, not to be finicky, but would you really put an apostrophe
in the name of a FORTH word?  Yes, we have ' (tick) ['] but otherwise ...

Rod Pemberton

Thread

DON'T Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 10:49 -0700
  Re: DON'T visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2014-05-31 10:56 -0700
    Re: DON'T bruce.mcfarling@gmail.com - 2014-06-16 08:00 -0700
      Re: DON'T "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-06-16 16:16 +0100
        Re: DON'T Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-06-16 10:56 -0700
          Re: DON'T "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-06-17 08:05 +0100
            Re: DON'T bruce.mcfarling@gmail.com - 2014-06-17 08:10 -0700
              Re: DON'T Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-06-18 01:54 -0700
                Re: DON'T bruce.mcfarling@gmail.com - 2014-06-18 02:34 -0700
        Re: DON'T BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2014-06-16 15:39 -0700
  Re: DON'T "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-05-31 17:58 -0400
    Re: DON'T Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 15:15 -0700
      Re: DON'T Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-05-31 15:21 -0700
    Re: DON'T "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-05-31 17:35 -1000
      Re: DON'T "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-06-01 00:14 -0400
    Re: DON'T hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2014-06-01 19:14 -0700
  Re: DON'T Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-31 15:26 -0700
  Re: DON'T chitselb <chitselb@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 06:02 -0700
    Re: DON'T Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2014-06-03 01:13 +0200
      Re: DON'T Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-06-03 01:23 +0200
        Re: DON'T chitselb <chitselb@gmail.com> - 2014-06-05 14:42 -0700
          Re: DON'T BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2014-06-18 14:27 -0700

csiph-web