Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP

From	anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP
Date	2016-10-24 11:15 +0000
Organization	Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Message-ID	<2016Oct24.131526@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <2016Oct21.182415@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <nudleg$dbb$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> <580b4d3a.724229665@news.eternal-september.org> <2016Oct22.154921@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <nujjrn$579$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> writes:
>Anton Ertl wrote:
>> And at the last meeting we standardized "1 chars = 1".  So if the
>> address unit is a byte, /STRING works on bytes.
...
>That option already existed under Forth-94.

Yes, it was an option, and all popular systems implemented this
option, and many programs rely on it.  I.e., it is common practice,
and that's why we standardized it.

>It was only necessary to
>state the assumption. All the 200x decision does is encourage
>sloppiness - code that under Forth-94 would be considered poorly
>written.

There are some people who consider such code poorly written, and many
that don't (as evidenced by the very common practice of writing such
code).  And that's pretty independent of the standard.  E.g., there
are people who consider code poorly written if it is not written to be
independent of the canonical flag representation, while every Forth
standard has specified a canonical flag representation.

>Presumably code that uses CHARS in some places and
>not others, CHAR+ in some places and 1+ in others, in a willy-nilly
>fashion is now perfectly legal under 200x ?

Not sure what you mean with willy-nilly.  Forth-94 and Forth-2012
programs can also use 1+, CHAR+, and CHARS in the same program.  In
the next standard a standard program can use 1+ where a Forth-2012
program should have used CHAR+ and use nothing where a Forth-2012 program
should have used CHARS or 1 CHARS /.

>CHARS and CHAR+ are still there (and need to be)

They need to be there for compatibility with standard Forth-2012
programs; they also allow people to use them who feel the urge to use
these words for whatever reasons.

- 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 2016: http://www.euroforth.org/ef16/

Thread

1 /STRING vs SNIP foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-10-18 19:31 -0700
  Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 07:24 +0300
  Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-19 07:52 +0000
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 16:58 -0700
      Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-21 16:01 +1000
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-21 00:51 -0700
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-21 00:57 -0700
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 05:20 -0700
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-22 00:25 +1000
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 09:13 -0700
              Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-21 16:24 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-21 20:06 +0200
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 14:19 -0700
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-22 13:46 +1000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-10-22 11:34 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-22 13:49 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-24 11:15 +1000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-24 03:01 +0200
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-24 13:29 +1000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-24 11:15 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-24 19:44 -0700
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-29 11:17 +1000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-10-29 04:09 -0500
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-29 16:44 +0000
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-29 17:11 -0700
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-31 19:11 +1100
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-31 08:47 +0000
      Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 03:49 -0700
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-22 20:02 -0700
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-22 20:13 -0700
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 21:09 -0700
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-23 18:36 -0700
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-10-27 14:07 +0100
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-27 19:12 -0700
              Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2016-10-28 19:39 +0100
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-28 20:26 -0700
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-10-26 19:52 -0700
      Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-27 09:42 +0000
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-10-27 06:46 -0700
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-10-28 07:31 +0000
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-10-28 11:33 +0100
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP jasmijn Bonting <tessa.bonting@gmail.com> - 2016-10-28 04:09 -0700
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2016-10-28 12:41 +0000
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-28 16:50 +0000
              Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-10-28 10:59 -0700
                Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-29 10:17 +0000
  Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-10-19 20:19 +1000
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-10-19 05:12 -0700
  1 /STRING vs SNIP trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 04:07 -0700
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-21 15:50 +0200
    Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-25 16:38 -0700
      Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2016-10-26 10:50 -0400
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2016-10-26 10:53 -0400
        Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-26 17:33 +0200
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2016-10-27 10:16 -0400
            Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 17:01 -0400
          Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 17:00 +0200
  Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 12:25 +0200

csiph-web