Re: single-xt approach in the standard

On 2024-09-17 06:54, Ruvim wrote:

Do you think that the Forth standard should recognize the classic single-xt approach as possible for implementing a standard Forth system?
 The classic single-xt approach implies that only one execution token (xt) is associated with a name token (nt), and only one name token is associated with a word (a named Forth definition). And words whose compilation semantics differ form default compilation semantics are implemented as immediate words.

Given I prefer single-xt (currently), what I don't get is how for a dual-xt system you define a single word with two actions for interpret and compile. I don't see a word to distinguish between the two, except maybe IMMEDIATE.

  : s" ( "ccc" -- sd | )
    [char] " parse
    state @ if postpone sliteral exit then
    dup >r allocate throw tuck r@ move r>
  ; immediate

Do you define the same word twice, once for compile (immediate) and again for interpret (order of definitions should not be important).  Example:
: s" ( "ccc" -- sd | ) postpone sliteral ; immediate
: s" ( "ccc" -- sd | ) dup >r allocate throw tuck r@ move r> ;
--
Anthony C Howe
achowe@snert.com                                   BarricadeMX & Milters
http://nanozen.snert.com/                          http://software.snert.com/