Re: single-xt approach in the standard

On 2024-09-24 12:10, Gerry Jackson wrote:

On 23/09/2024 18:02, Anton Ertl wrote:

mhx@iae.nl  (mhx) writes:

On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 8:36:10 +0000,albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl  wrote:
>

In article<vcq1e5$25spg$7@dont-email.me>,
Ruvim<ruvim.pinka@gmail.com>  wrote:

[..]

   1 constant a
   1 constant b
   ' a ' b = .

...

Why? 'a' and 'b' are user defined words, '=' is a standard word,
and 'true' is the expected outcome.

Are you sure?
>
[~:152648] iforth
FORTH> 1 constant a  ok
FORTH> 1 constant b  ok
FORTH> ' a ' b = . 0  ok
>
I actually know of no system that outputs -1.
>
- anton

 I know it's different but:
 1 constant a
synonym b a
' a ' b = . \ displayed -1 in 5 out of 6 Forths I just tried, including GForth.
 Comparing xt's is unsafe
 

The same xt means the same execution semantics and nothing more.
But the same execution semantics can be identified by different xt-s. Thus, from two different xt-s one cannot say whether they identify different execution semantics or the same execution semantics.
--
Ruvim