Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cl forth 
Sujet : Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth
De : dxforth (at) *nospam* gmail.com (dxf)
Groupes : comp.lang.forth
Date : 05. May 2025, 01:29:20
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <9ee66941122eefae652fdb47eb214aa6b09bd584@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/05/2025 1:34 am, albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote:
In article <d9149a9d12db559e2720156b315fcfdcdd90e3fe@i2pn2.org>,
dxf  <dxforth@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/05/2025 10:16 pm, albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote:
...
I struggled with giving a meaning to QUIT and ABORT.
>
Me too.
>
I arrived at
   QUIT initialises both stacks and goes interpreting.
   ABORT only initialises the return stack and goes interpreting.
>
(if there is an exception system, both must initialise that too.
I can't think of a QUIT that can be caught and at the same time
initialises the exceptions.)
>
Technically both end an application distinguished only by the fact
QUIT lets you examine what was on the stack.  Presumably this was
for debugging purposes.  For reasons known only to ANS (and maybe
Mitch Bradley) both were assigned exception codes and thus CATCHable.
>
As I wanted a fool-proof way of ending a turnkey app for any reason
I let QUIT do that.  That it may leave stuff on the data stack is of
no consequence to a turnkey.  A QUIT is considered by the OS as a
'success' whereas as an uncaught ABORT (or other exception) means
'failure'.
>
 
Interpretation of QUIT as a REPL is IMHO the more useful.
 
Look at the end of my turnkey lisp, build with
lina -c lispl.frt
 
---- lispl.frt ------------
    ....
    "more.scm" lisp-load-from-file
    : doit   'ERROR RESTORED lisp-on QUIT ;
---------------------------
The doit is the entry point of the turnkey.
Forth is morphed into a lisp interpreter and goes repl-ing
according to QUIT.
[ It understand
    (define (first-denomination kinds-of-coins)
      (cond ((= kinds-of-coins 1) 1)
      ...
  with surprisingly little modification of the interpreter.
  using PREFIX and a revectoring of NAME ('BL WORD' replacement). ]
 
You can replace QUIT by EXIT, and the doit would end normally,
with a return code OKAY (0).  You can of course leave out the
EXIT, because this is implied at the end of each definition.
Also if you lisped decently, of course, you get OKAY.
 
If QUIT is replaced by 19 THROW, it would end with a return code 19.

Classical QUIT in my system is currently handled by a headerless word
I've dubbed (QUIT) .  Thus far I've not needed to expose it.  OTOH I've
not written the type of apps you have.  I've no qualms changing things
if the need arises.  AFAICS classical QUIT (unconditional return to the
forth interpreter loop) no longer exists since ANS assigned it a THROW
code.


Date Sujet#  Auteur
27 Mar 25 * "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"200Alexis
27 Mar 25 +* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"5Martin Nicholas
28 Mar 25 i`* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"4Alexis
28 Mar 25 i `* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"3Martin Nicholas
30 Mar 25 i  +- Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"1Alexis
30 Mar 25 i  `- Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"1Bernd Linsel
28 Mar 25 +* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"7anthk
29 Mar 25 i`* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"6mhx
29 Mar 25 i +- Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"1dxf
30 Mar 25 i +* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"3anthk
5 Apr 25 i i+- Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"1anthk
6 Apr 25 i i`- Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"1sjack
31 Mar 25 i `- Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"1John Ames
30 Mar 25 +* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"88sjack
1 Apr 25 i`* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"87dxf
29 Apr 25 i `* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth86Hans Bezemer
30 Apr 25 i  +* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth82dxf
30 Apr 25 i  i+* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth79Hans Bezemer
1 May 25 i  ii`* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth78dxf
1 May 25 i  ii +* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth3John Doe
1 May 25 i  ii i+- Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth1Stephen Pelc
1 May 25 i  ii i`- Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth1Anton Ertl
1 May 25 i  ii `* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth74Hans Bezemer
2 May 25 i  ii  +- Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth1dxf
3 May 25 i  ii  `* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth72dxf
3 May 25 i  ii   +* QUIT and ABORT (was: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth)70Anton Ertl
3 May 25 i  ii   i+- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
3 May 25 i  ii   i+* Re: QUIT and ABORT67dxf
3 May 25 i  ii   ii`* Re: QUIT and ABORT66Anton Ertl
4 May 25 i  ii   ii +* Re: QUIT and ABORT64dxf
4 May 25 i  ii   ii i`* Re: QUIT and ABORT63Anton Ertl
5 May 25 i  ii   ii i +- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
5 May 25 i  ii   ii i +* Re: QUIT and ABORT56dxf
5 May 25 i  ii   ii i i`* Re: QUIT and ABORT55Ruvim
5 May 25 i  ii   ii i i +- Re: QUIT and ABORT1Ruvim
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i +* Re: QUIT and ABORT3dxf
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i i+- Re: QUIT and ABORT1Anton Ertl
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i i`- Re: QUIT and ABORT1Ruvim
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i `* Re: QUIT and ABORT50dxf
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i  +* Re: QUIT and ABORT3Ruvim
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i  i+- Re: QUIT and ABORT1Anton Ertl
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i  i`- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i  `* Re: QUIT and ABORT46Anton Ertl
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i i   `* Re: QUIT and ABORT45dxf
7 May 25 i  ii   ii i i    `* Re: QUIT and ABORT44Ruvim
8 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     +* Re: QUIT and ABORT42dxf
8 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i`* Re: QUIT and ABORT41Ruvim
9 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i `* Re: QUIT and ABORT40dxf
9 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i  `* Re: QUIT and ABORT39Ruvim
9 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i   `* Re: QUIT and ABORT38dxf
9 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i    +* Re: QUIT and ABORT2albert
10 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i    i`- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
9 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i    `* Re: QUIT and ABORT35Ruvim
10 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i     +- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
13 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i     `* Re: QUIT and ABORT33Ruvim
14 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i      `* Re: QUIT and ABORT32dxf
14 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i       `* Re: QUIT and ABORT31Ruvim
15 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i        `* Re: QUIT and ABORT30dxf
16 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i         `* Re: QUIT and ABORT29Ruvim
16 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i          `* Re: QUIT and ABORT28dxf
16 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i           `* Re: QUIT and ABORT27Ruvim
17 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i            `* Re: QUIT and ABORT26dxf
17 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i             `* Re: QUIT and ABORT25Ruvim
17 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i              `* Re: QUIT and ABORT24dxf
17 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i               `* Re: QUIT and ABORT23Ruvim
18 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                `* Re: QUIT and ABORT22dxf
18 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                 +* Re: QUIT and ABORT2Anton Ertl
18 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                 i`- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
18 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                 `* Re: QUIT and ABORT19Ruvim
18 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                  `* Re: QUIT and ABORT18dxf
19 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                   `* Re: QUIT and ABORT17Ruvim
20 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                    `* Re: QUIT and ABORT16dxf
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                     `* Re: QUIT and ABORT15Ruvim
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      +* Re: QUIT and ABORT9mhx
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      i+* Re: QUIT and ABORT5Ruvim
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      ii`* Re: QUIT and ABORT4mhx
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      ii +- Re: QUIT and ABORT1Ruvim
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      ii +- Re: QUIT and ABORT1Anton Ertl
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      ii `- Re: QUIT and ABORT1albert
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      i`* Re: QUIT and ABORT3Anton Ertl
11 Jun 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      i `* Re: QUIT and ABORT2Gerry Jackson
12 Jun 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      i  `- Re: QUIT and ABORT1Anton Ertl
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      +- Re: QUIT and ABORT1albert
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                      `* Re: QUIT and ABORT4dxf
24 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                       `* Re: QUIT and ABORT3Ruvim
25 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                        `* Re: QUIT and ABORT2dxf
26 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     i                         `- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
8 May 25 i  ii   ii i i     `- Re: QUIT and ABORT1Ruvim
5 May 25 i  ii   ii i `* Re: QUIT and ABORT5mhx
6 May 25 i  ii   ii i  +- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
7 May 25 i  ii   ii i  `* Re: QUIT and ABORT3albert
7 May 25 i  ii   ii i   `* Re: QUIT and ABORT2minforth
7 May 25 i  ii   ii i    `- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
4 May 25 i  ii   ii `- Re: QUIT and ABORT1dxf
4 May 25 i  ii   i`- Re: QUIT and ABORT (was: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth)1albert
5 May 25 i  ii   `- Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth1dxf
30 Apr 25 i  i`* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth2sjack
1 May 25 i  i `- Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth1dxf
30 Apr 25 i  `* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth3albert
30 Apr 25 i   `* Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth2Hans Bezemer
30 Apr 25 i    `- Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing in Forth1mhx
4 Apr 25 +- Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"1dxf
5 Apr 25 `* Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"98dxf

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal