Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines

On 1/02/2025 6:50 pm, Anton Ertl wrote:

dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> writes:

If I use locals I'm more likely to
use the ANS notation.  I notice Forth Inc does too - perhaps why they were so
adverse to conceding to { } .

 
The reason why Forth, Inc. argued against { } is that they support an
existing code base that uses { } for comments; they use { } comments
extensively in SwiftForth, and their customers use it, too.  They
voted for {: :}, so they obviously don't have a problem with the
ordering of locals in {: :} (which is the same as for { }).

IIRC FI was pressed hard for { } but they wouldn't budge.  It was odd
since a single character to delimit a comment was inherently problematic.
I find it hard to believe FI customers wouldn't have jumped at the chance
to get a proper comment scheme and nicer looking locals syntax.  As it is
now they're stuck with two lesser things.

Using WHERE LOCALS| in SwiftForth x64-Linux 4.0.0-RC89 only brings up
the definition of LOCALS|, but no uses.  "WHERE {:" brings up the
definition and 5 uses of "{:", all with more than one local; so they
obviously do not have a problem with the ordering of locals in {: :}.
Can you elaborate on what you have noticed?

Interesting since...

SwiftForth i386-Win32 3.11.9-RC1 01-Sep-2022

85 matches for LOCAL|  (a few false positives in that)
0  matches for {: :}   (despite being implemented)