Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #25979
| From | Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Execution tokens for return stack manipulation |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| References | <l1q4vi$jdi$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi> <D6KdncmsPd8EAN3PnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@supernews.com> <l1q7rr$lpd$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi> |
| Message-ID | <aO2dnRG2d5PQN93PnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@supernews.com> (permalink) |
| Date | 2013-09-23 15:53 -0500 |
Lauri Alanko <la@iki.fi> wrote: > In article <D6KdncmsPd8EAN3PnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@supernews.com>, > Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote: >> You can't tick and execute >R. >> >> This is implied because of the interpretation semantics of >R: > > Ah, that was it, thanks! > > However, I must say this is somewhat non-obvious. The prohibition > comes from 4.1.2, which forbids "attempting to obtain the execution > token of a definition with undefined interpretation semantics". > > But 3.4.3.1 says that EXECUTE executes the _execution_ semantics, > which the return stack operations do have. And neither the glossary > for the tick operations nor for EXECUTE mentions the constraint. So it > is very hard to find out, unless one already knows where to look. That's a fair complaint. Perhaps we could just add a cross-reference to the glossary for the tick operations? I think it's fair to say that the Forth 200x discussions around the area of rewording (or rewriting) the handling of compilation/ execution/interpretation semantics have been tortuous. It's really hard to get right in a way that allows all the variations of Forth systems but prohibits the things that shouldn't be done. Andrew.
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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