Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"

On 6/04/2025 5:10 pm, mhx wrote:

On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 5:21:05 +0000, dxf wrote:
 

On 5/04/2025 6:12 pm, mhx wrote:

[..]

On the topic of documentation Forth Standard (the document to which
everyone looks) hasn't clarified aspects of REPRESENT F. etc.

 
I don't let the Standard confuse me. It's beneficial when others
adhere to it closely, unless it's not. In particular, I don't agree
to the efforts to try to standardize untested 'good ideas.'
...

Do you mean 'significant digits' as opposed to 'decimal places'?  FWIW
I believe Forth-94's introduction of the former had definite benefits -
particularly if one is interested in compact representation.  For me
it wasn't a case of either/or but how I could combine both in a simple
user-friendly interface.  Oddly Forth-94's lack of functionality and
vague specification proved an advantage.  I wasn't hog-tied by it.

Probably when Forth-94 came out 'significant digits' was "untested".
But it's now been two decades for me.  Over that time I've scrutinized,
replicated, massaged, had thought bubbles I then rejected.  So for me
at least it's 'proven'.