Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Rod Pemberton" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: uninitialized and implicitly initialized locals Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 16:24:13 -0400 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <2014Oct11.125348@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <2_CdnedZqtY0MKfJnZ2dnUU7-VOdnZ2d@supernews.com> <2014Oct15.144442@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <3dSdnTQ6X5oRAaPJnZ2dnUU7-XOdnZ2d@supernews.com> <2014Oct16.141939@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <2014Oct18.145533@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <2014Oct20.144848@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> 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:34036 On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:48:48 -0400, Anton Ertl wrote: > I doubt that Chuck Moore sees all of these systems as equally good and > valid solutions. It's a progression: First he did Forth, the > mini-Forth, then microForth, then cmForth, then machineForth, and now > colorForth. At every step he gave preference to his new design over > his old design, and he never returned to miniForth or PolyForth. He > did abandon the approach of leaving the Forth compiler/text > interpreter away completely (OKAD). When I read a statement like that, this is what I think about it. 1) Charles Moore has contined to search for what he believes is the most optimal solution for implementing Forth. 2) Charles Moore hasn't found that solution yet. Since he's the creator of Forth, I think that says something. BTW, you listed the Forths through which C.M. progressed and later referenced one that wasn't in your list of progessions: PolyForth. Where does it go in the list? Rod Pemberton