Sujet : Re: Number parsing with checks
De : dxforth (at) *nospam* gmail.com (dxf)
Groupes : comp.lang.forthDate : 13. Oct 2024, 03:59:55
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <9bb57132c366402e72186ec8bbfe7eefdf085bbb@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 13/10/2024 1:20 pm, Ruvim wrote:
On 2024-10-13 05:13, dxf wrote:
On 13/10/2024 12:54 am, Ruvim wrote:
On 2024-10-12 05:45, dxf wrote:
The basics:
>
: .BAD ( -- ) cr ." Invalid item" .abort ;
>
: ZE? ( x -- ) if .bad then ; \ abort if non-zero
: NZ? ( x -- ) 0= ze? ; \ abort if zero
>
Typically, if word name ends with a question mark, the first (top) output parameter of the word is a *flag*. And it's true for all standard words. (though, opposite is not true)
>
It's rather similar.
>
ZE? NZ? destructively tests TOS
But these words do not return a flag in the first output parameter. So, their names violate the common convention.
Conventions are a guide. Thankfully they're not yet a law.
Number parsing with checks
Re: Number parsing with checks