Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #52329
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: 1 /STRING vs SNIP |
| Date | 2016-10-31 08:47 +0000 |
| Organization | Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien |
| Message-ID | <2016Oct31.094701@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <nujjrn$579$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2016Oct24.131526@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <nv0ps1$tte$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2016Oct29.184434@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <nv6uiq$gh0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
"HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> writes:
>Anton Ertl wrote:
>> ...
>> The introduction of CHARS and CHAR+ did not happen for informative
>> purposes,
>
>How do you know? It can't be ruled out.
It says so in the Forth-94 document. From E.2.3:
|However, there are cases where a character is larger than an address
|unit. Examples include (1) systems with small address units (e.g.,
|bit- and nibble-addressed systems), and (2) systems with large
|character sets (e.g., 16-bit characters on a byte-addressed
|machine). CHAR+ and CHARS operators, analogous to CELL+ and CELLS are
|available to allow maximum portability.
>> Anyway, if you feel the need to use these unnecessary abstractions in
>> your programs, they are still there, and nobody has proposed removing
>> them, so you are free to use these words to write what you consider
>> professional, readable, clear, consistent and informative code.
>
>The fact is CHAR+ CHARS are necessary and must remain in CORE so
>systems can read/write portable code.
Systems don't write code. And programs using CHAR+ CHARS are not any
more portable in practice than code using 1+ and nothing.
>200x needs to explain to users
>what it hopes to gain by allowing coding such as this:
>
>: nextword \ ad -- ad'
> dup c@ + 1+ ;
More standard programs; another benefit is that this reflects the
mainstream of Forth usage in the standard, so that system implementors
are not misled into thinking that it's a good idea to choose UTF-16 as
char encoding on byte-addressed machines.
- 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/
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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