Re: THROW codes and ambiguous conditions

It was thus said that the Great albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl once stated:

Good work, 12K is justly considered tiny.

  Thank you.

[1]    I implemented CORE, CORE-EXT, DOUBLE, DOUBLE-EXT, EXCEPTION,
      EXCEPTION-EXT, LOCAL, LOCAL-EXT, TOOLS, some of TOOLS-EXT [3],
      SEARCH, SEARCH-EXT, STRING and STRING-EXT.
>
[2]    https://github.com/spc476/ANS-Forth
>
[3]    Words implemented from TOOLS-EXT: AHEAD, BYE, CS-PICK, CS_ROLL, N>R,
      NAME>COMPILE, NAME>INTERPRET, NAME>STRING, NR>, STATE,
      TRAVERSE-WORDLIST, [DEFINED], [ELSE], [IF], [THEN], [UNDEFINED].
>
[4]    When reading about it [5], I decided I didn't want anything to do
      with that quagmire of a word.
>
[5]    https://forth-standard.org/standard/tools/SYNONYM

 
You have included a lot of words that I considered not needed for
a tiny Forth.

  Such as?  One goal (which kind of went to the wayside as I was writing)
was to use as much of standard Forth as possible to write the code (and less
to implement in assembly), thus the inclusion of AHEAD, CS-ROLL, etc.  But
once I past 8K with pretty much CORE, CORE-EXT, SEARCH, SEARCH-EXT and the
ones I was using from TOOLS-EXT, I had past 8K, so I decided I might as well
include DOUBLE, DOUBLE-EXT, STRING, STRING-EXT, LOCAL and LOCAL-EXT.  At
that point, I might as well make a Forth that was useful for as many people
as possible, while not locking it into a particular system.  That's why I
didn't bother with BLOCK, BLOCK-EXT, FACILITY or FACILITY-EXT (leaving that
for the others to write for their system). 

The first time I will ever need CS-PICK I will add it to the library.
It is not eligible for a kernel word.

  I wasn't sure if it was needed or not.  It just falls pack to PICK anyway.

  -spc