Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation

From	anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation
Date	2013-09-24 12:36 +0000
Organization	Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Message-ID	<2013Sep24.143635@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> (permalink)
References	<l1q4vi$jdi$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi> <D6KdncmsPd8EAN3PnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@supernews.com> <l1qbnn$bj5$1@online.de> <qaGdnUX4zJdk4dzPnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@supernews.com>

Show all headers | View raw

Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> writes:
>4.1.2 Ambiguous conditions
>
>attempting to obtain the execution token, (e.g., with 6.1.0070 ',
>6.1.1550 FIND, etc.) of a definition with undefined interpretation
>semantics;

I think it's a problem that this is not mentioned as ambiguous
condition in ' ['] FIND SEARCH-WORDLIST.

>But what is "run-time semantics" ?  Don't we have enough kinds of
>semantics already?

"Run-time semantics" occurs in various words that have compilation
semantics (e.g., IF).  It describes what the code compiled by the
compilation semantics does at run-time.  It's a helper for defining
compilation semantics, so not every word has such a section (not even
through a default mechanism).

We could define >R etc. in this way, e.g.:

>R 

 Interpretation: Interpretation semantics for this word are undefined.

 Compilation: ( -- )
  Compile the run-time semantics below

 Run-time: ( x -- ) ( R:  -- x )
  Move x to the return stack.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
   EuroForth 2013: http://www.euroforth.org/ef13/

Thread

Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Lauri Alanko <la@iki.fi> - 2013-09-23 19:32 +0000
  Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-09-23 14:59 -0500
    Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Lauri Alanko <la@iki.fi> - 2013-09-23 20:21 +0000
      Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-09-23 15:53 -0500
    Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-09-23 23:27 +0200
      Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2013-09-23 23:37 +0100
      Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-09-24 06:52 -0500
        Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-09-24 12:36 +0000
          Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-09-24 12:10 -0500
            Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-09-24 22:22 +0200
        Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-09-24 16:14 +0200
          Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-09-24 12:12 -0500
  Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@nohavenotit.com> - 2013-09-23 18:09 -0400
  Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-09-23 12:40 -1000
    Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Lauri Alanko <la@iki.fi> - 2013-09-23 22:43 +0000
      Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation Spam@ControlQ.com - 2013-09-24 01:38 -0400

csiph-web