S\" in the FILE word set to provide the interpretation semantics. Thus, we propose taking the second option, and provide a new definition of The same can be said of the interpretation semantics for S\". The interpretation semantics of S" are provided in a separateĭefinition, so that small systems are not required to implement it. Which adds the interpretation action, in the same manner as S". Revise the definition of S\" to include interpretation It seems to me that S\" is just as useful as S" in interpretation mode. S\" is a sister word to S" but is not extended in the same S" is extended in the File-Access word set to be usable in Used it myself - apart from programs to test the current implementation. In 4tH there are plenty of alternatives to resolve the kind of problems where The code is expanded at runtime - not compile
Mode (4tH doesn't have a 'real' equivalent to that state - it defined thereĪs 'outside a definition'). It is the only escape code that standard expands toĭue to 4tH's architecture it has ALWAYS been available in 'interpretation' Most of the proposal is supported, except for \m, which is expandedĪs 'm' instead of CR/LF. Programmers should consider it foremost as an aid for porting ANS Forth This word is only available through libraries and the preprocessor and 4tH So I am in favor of making interpretation Important because any roadblocks they face decreases the chance that Source of problems, especially among novices (and novices are especially In my experience supporting programmers who are trying to use Forth,ĭifferences between compilation and interpretation syntax are a major So, if I ever switch over to S\", it will definitely work in interpret Mechanism - something like 15 years old - for handling escaped strings,Īnd it does work in both interpret and compile state. I do not currently implement S\" as specified, but I do have a similar I maintain an open source CForth system and the Forth kernel underlying I would not use (parts of) this proposal in my programs. I would use (parts of) this proposal in my programs if this proposal was in the Forth standard. I would use (parts of) this proposal in my programs if the systems I am interested in implemented it. Programmers I have used (parts of) this proposal in my programs. ĤtH will never implement the proposal in full. Forth 7 cross compilers There are no plans to implement the proposal in full in. will implement the proposal in full in some future release.
will implement the proposal in full in release. implements the proposal in full in a development version. already implements the proposal in full since release.
Enhanced local variable syntax Interpret S\"
0 kommentar(er)
