Re: Overflow Test for M*/

On 13/07/2024 6:15 pm, minforth wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 2:03:54 +0000, dxf wrote:

How many applications have you written requiring a negative divisor?

 
What a silly question.
 
Even in simple Newtonian physics it is not always possible to define
a reference system that avoids negative values. Let alone in
electrical networks.

Moore defined floored division which used only positive/unsigned divisors.
So I was curious.

 
The "explanation" that +n2 is there to compensate for the performance
loss of some (old?) CPUs sounds strange in a standard document.

Can you make the case it shouldn't?  Truth cares nothing for what may,
or may not, exist in a Forth Standard.