Sujet : Re: quotations (was: Back & Forth - Co-routines)
De : albert (at) *nospam* spenarnc.xs4all.nl
Groupes : comp.lang.forthDate : 09. Feb 2025, 19:54:55
Autres entêtes
Organisation : KPN B.V.
Message-ID : <nnd$0737996d$02c1acf0@e966d94a070f80fd>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
In article <
2025Feb8.124132@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>,
Anton Ertl <
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
<SNIP>
"There's a need for definitions without names" is something completely
different than "named definitions were neither needed nor wanted".
I see it reversed, and view { } (anonymous code sequence) as fundamental.
Assume (CREATE) "name" that creates a named dictionary header and
leaves it address. This is general building block for e.g. VARIABLE
CONSTANT : .
Assume { } that compiles and leaves an executable token.
Assume LINK-IN that links in an nt into the current wordlist.
Then : can be defines as
: : (CREATE) POSTPONE { ; \ Leaves "name token" , start compilation.
: ; POSTPONE } OVER >R
>CFA @ SWAP >CFA ! ( nt nt-temp -- ) \ Copy behaviour "code"
R> ( nt , left by : ) LINK-IN ; IMMEDIATE
There is no "need" for definition without "name", there is only an
underlying concept that is more fundamental than the concepts like
execution token, name token, definition or what have you.
- anton
Groetjes Albert
-- Temu exploits Christians: (Disclaimer, only 10 apostles)Last Supper Acrylic Suncatcher - 15Cm Round Stained Glass- Style WallArt For Home, Office And Garden Decor - Perfect For Windows, Bars,And Gifts For Friends Family And Colleagues.