Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: FORTH LITE TUTORIAL based on MPE VFX
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 17:54:18 -0400
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <op.xh20gsok6zenlw@localhost>
References: <2d2eba75-5d44-422a-8a3f-751702d8cea6@googlegroups.com> <5be1ebb2-75e3-433a-bb83-542f3763acb1@googlegroups.com> <bfd2068a-74a8-4b36-ab09-8234095c2917@googlegroups.com> <45f5f8f9-e2c0-42f1-8640-8108c55d397f@googlegroups.com> <1ad192b0-6c5b-462c-8d19-cad563dbf974@googlegroups.com> <557e2d7a-6003-42af-803b-5d21a00315bd@googlegroups.com> <87ceaa31-134f-4503-8a49-e07b4061b301@googlegroups.com> <29b02601-d43c-4f76-8f3a-02bb4855a09a@googlegroups.com> <xMudnWent_7oNjjOnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@supernews.com> <31f28699-46bc-4f5b-a1f2-565d663dfd3e@googlegroups.com> <2cb5ef69-0e06-4a07-8594-5f65b3d2a714@googlegroups.com> <4e5d1063-b6f1-4cd8-ae53-be0435e372ee@googlegroups.com> <96e20bcc-9f13-4212-9959-6fa4765b40c1@googlegroups.com> <243713a6-b8b2-4053-bb59-6249ebf6b7f5@googlegroups.com> <e9d7bded-bedb-47c9-b082-e8ade3bfad30@googlegroups.com> <op.xhzjw3w06zenlw@localhost> <39b481fe-3c92-44bc-aee7-b344fa9d523d@googlegroups.com> <op.xh07u6ls6zenlw@localhost> <ELadnZyCKqQLXzbOnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@supernews.com>
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:31894

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 02:49:57 -0400, Elizabeth D. Rather  
<erather@forth.com> wrote:

> Treating arrays of binary data as strings can be a useful strategy,
> so you can move them around using string operators, for example.

Yes, I agree.  That's how C works.

> No one is talking about changing COUNT to take a cell count. If you want  
> a cell count word, you will call it something else. It is very bad form  
> to make a significant change in the function of a standard word without  
> changing its name. That is why, for instance, that Forth94's improved  
> version of EXPECT is called ACCEPT.

Isn't it worse form to preserve the mistakes of the past for
compatibility's sake?

EXPECT ACCEPT QUERY ...

NOT NEGATE INVERT ...

How many versions of the same thing do you need before you
fix the original mistake?


Rod Pemberton