Re: quotations

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cl forth 
Sujet : Re: quotations
De : no.email (at) *nospam* nospam.invalid (Paul Rubin)
Groupes : comp.lang.forth
Date : 09. Feb 2025, 11:36:04
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <87o6zbwgkr.fsf@nightsong.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
User-Agent : Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> writes:
IMO it does nothing for readability to see a definition interrupted by
another.  My reaction is one of WTF.

Maybe it looks weird in Forth, but similar things were present in
languages as old as Fortran, which had "statement functions" (idk when
those were introduced though).  Algol had them, and lambda calculus
(invented in the 1920's, before computers existed) had them.  It's not
inherently bad, though it can make code confusing if over-used.  node.js
uses the style heavily in a deeply nested and painful way.

   : make-action ( n -- xt ) [n:d ." You pressed " . ] ;
I don't understand make-action at all.  What is it meant to be doing?

Imagine this function:
 
  : action-5 ( -- ) ." you pressed 5" ;

That does the obvious thing: prints a fixed message, nothing else.
Similarly you want action-1, action-2, and so on.

How to generalize that?  How about just having something that takes
a numeric argument, and gives you an xt that runs that action?

  : make-action-n ( n -- xt )  ( need some magic here! )  ... ;

So, "5 make-action-n" gives an xt that is equivalent to ' action-5,
but you can make independent xt's for other values of n.

That's what I called make-action in the example I showed, and for the
"magic" it used a quotation.  Maybe there is some reasonably easy
alternative way to do the same thing in traditional Forth.  The only
ones that occur to me right now are pretty messy though.

Call me boring but I don't like inventing new syntax only to have to

Well, it's a one-time addition of new syntax, not something re-learned
in every new program.  Like 'x' is new syntax for [char] x, but once
you've used it a few times you remember it and it seems to me like an
improvement.

So are quotations worth it for Forth?  I don't know.  I see some uses
for them but I'd tend to say that style is more common in GC'd
languages.

the antithesis of Forth - the opposite of being simple.

Forth is simple in some ways, complicated (or at least non-intuitive) in
others ;).

Date Sujet#  Auteur
31 Jan 25 * Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines91dxf
31 Jan 25 +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1Anton Ertl
31 Jan 25 +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
31 Jan 25 +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines14Hans Bezemer
1 Feb 25 i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines13dxf
1 Feb 25 i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines12Anton Ertl
1 Feb 25 i  +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines4dxf
1 Feb 25 i  i+- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
1 Feb 25 i  i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Anton Ertl
2 Feb 25 i  i `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
2 Feb 25 i  `* Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines7dxf
2 Feb 25 i   `* Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines6Anton Ertl
2 Feb 25 i    +- Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
2 Feb 25 i    +* Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Anton Ertl
2 Feb 25 i    i`- Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1Bernd Linsel
6 Feb 25 i    `* Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Waldek Hebisch
6 Feb 25 i     `- Re: Use of { and } was Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
1 Feb 25 +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines70Ruvim
2 Feb 25 i+- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
2 Feb 25 i+* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Paul Rubin
3 Feb 25 ii`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
3 Feb 25 i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines66Ruvim
3 Feb 25 i +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines57albert
3 Feb 25 i i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines56Paul Rubin
4 Feb 25 i i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines55albert
6 Feb 25 i i  +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2HenryHH
6 Feb 25 i i  i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
6 Feb 25 i i  `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines52minforth
6 Feb 25 i i   +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2albert
6 Feb 25 i i   i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
6 Feb 25 i i   `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines49Anton Ertl
6 Feb 25 i i    `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines48minforth
6 Feb 25 i i     +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines19dxf
6 Feb 25 i i     i+* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2minforth
7 Feb 25 i i     ii`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1sjack
6 Feb 25 i i     i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines16Anton Ertl
6 Feb 25 i i     i +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
7 Feb 25 i i     i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines14dxf
7 Feb 25 i i     i  +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2minforth
7 Feb 25 i i     i  i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
8 Feb 25 i i     i  `* quotations (was: Back & Forth - Co-routines)11Anton Ertl
9 Feb 25 i i     i   +* Re: quotations9dxf
9 Feb 25 i i     i   i+* Re: quotations4Paul Rubin
9 Feb 25 i i     i   ii`* Re: quotations3dxf
9 Feb 25 i i     i   ii `* Re: quotations2Paul Rubin
9 Feb 25 i i     i   ii  `- Re: quotations1minforth
9 Feb 25 i i     i   i`* Re: quotations4Anton Ertl
9 Feb 25 i i     i   i +- Re: quotations1albert
10 Feb 25 i i     i   i `* Re: quotations2dxf
10 Feb 25 i i     i   i  `- Re: quotations1albert
9 Feb 25 i i     i   `- Re: quotations (was: Back & Forth - Co-routines)1albert
6 Feb 25 i i     +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines27Anton Ertl
6 Feb 25 i i     i+- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
7 Feb 25 i i     i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines25minforth
8 Feb 25 i i     i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines24Anton Ertl
8 Feb 25 i i     i  +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines4minforth
9 Feb 25 i i     i  i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3Paul Rubin
9 Feb 25 i i     i  i +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
9 Feb 25 i i     i  i `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1Anton Ertl
9 Feb 25 i i     i  `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines19Paul Rubin
9 Feb 25 i i     i   +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3minforth
9 Feb 25 i i     i   i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2Paul Rubin
10 Feb 25 i i     i   i `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
10 Feb 25 i i     i   `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines15Anton Ertl
10 Feb 25 i i     i    +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines8ahmed
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i`* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines7Anton Ertl
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1ahmed
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3mhx
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i i+- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1Paul Rubin
10 Feb 25 i i     i    i `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
10 Feb 25 i i     i    `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines6Paul Rubin
11 Feb 25 i i     i     `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines5minforth
11 Feb 25 i i     i      `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines4Paul Rubin
12 Feb 25 i i     i       +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1albert
12 Feb 25 i i     i       `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2minforth
14 Feb 25 i i     i        `- Multi-Tasking (was: Back & Forth - Co-routines)1Anton Ertl
7 Feb 25 i i     `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1minforth
22 Mar 25 i `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines8sjack
23 Mar 25 i  `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines7dxf
23 Mar 25 i   +* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2sjack
24 Mar 25 i   i`- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1sjack
24 Mar 25 i   +- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1sjack
24 Mar 25 i   `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3dxf
24 Mar 25 i    `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2dxf
24 Mar 25 i     `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf
11 Mar 25 `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines4dxf
21 Mar 25  `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines3dxf
21 Mar 25   `* Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines2dxf
22 Mar 25    `- Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines1dxf

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal