Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #31084 > unrolled thread

DON'T

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  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

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#31226

On Monday, June 2, 2014 7:23:46 PM UTC-4, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> Coos Haak wrote:
> 
> > Whatever you want. Twenty years ago I saw : UNDER SWAP DROP ;
> 
> > but anything like : UNDER OVER SWAP TUCK NIP ROT ; is likely possible ;-(
> 
> > I looked and neither Gforth, Win32Forth or SwiftForth have it.
> 
> 
> 
> VolksForth had UNDER as what is now TUCK ( n1 n2 -- n2 n1 n2 ) (bigForth 
> 
> inherited it, Gforth didn't).  Another possibile definition could have been
> 
> 
> 
> : UNDER ( n1 n2 -- n1 n1 n2 )  >R DUP R> ;
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Bernd Paysan
> 
> "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
> 
> http://bernd-paysan.de/

I like this one best.  This meaning of UNDER ( a b -- a a b ) seems to fit better with +UNDER  ( a b c -- a+c b ) and OVER ( a b -- a b a )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31647

On Thursday, June 5, 2014 5:42:20 PM UTC-4, chitselb wrote:
> On Monday, June 2, 2014 7:23:46 PM UTC-4, Bernd Paysan wrote:

>> VolksForth had UNDER as what is now TUCK ( n1 n2 -- n2 n1 n2 ) (bigForth 
>> inherited it, Gforth didn't).  Another possibile definition could have been
>>
>> : UNDER ( n1 n2 -- n1 n1 n2 )  >R DUP R> ;
> I like this one best.  This meaning of UNDER ( a b -- a a b ) seems to fit better with +UNDER  ( a b c -- a+c b ) and OVER ( a b -- a b a )

Because of the multiple meanings, I normally name that one ``DUP2ND'' since when I see that word in code I haven't looked at for a while, I recognize immediately what its doing, and since VolksForth had a VolksForth64, ``UNDER'' always makes me stop and ask myself "which UNDER is this again?".

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web