Re: VALUE and TO implementation

On 7/08/2024 4:11 pm, Anton Ertl wrote:

dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> writes:

On 6/08/2024 2:27 pm, dxf wrote:

...
ISTR dual-xt solutions also have problems with 'edge cases'.

>
Works for state-smart but not dual-xt:
>
 : ,"  postpone s"  dup c,  here  over allot  swap cmove ;
>
 ," Hello world"

 
I did not understand at first what this code was supposed to do, in
particular why you would want to perform the compilation semantics of
S" outside a colon definition.

Not understand?  Didn't you write a paper on state-smart words?
 

After some thinking I found that this code actually relies on a buggy
implementation of S" which does not implement the compilation
semantics of the standard S" in this usage.

Is the 200x TC prepared to attest to that with a vote of members?  Because
if they don't, then common practice prevails.

It's better to write code
that does not rely on such bugs:
 
: ,"  ['] s" execute  dup c,  here  over allot  swap cmove ;
 
," Hello world"

So dual-xt words don't replace state-smart.  Rather it's about what you want
these words to do.  Good to know.