wmb@MITCH.ENG.SUN.COM (01/03/91)
> > prefer to go in the opposite direction, removing some of the syntax > > that Forth already has (defining words have "one word lookahead" syntax, > > and control structures have syntax). Syntax is an impediment to > > extensibility, and the few syntactic constructs that Forth already > > has frequently cause problems. > What is your alternative to control structures? Get CFA from stack? Yes. Mitch Bradley, wmb@Eng.Sun.COM
UNBCIC@BRFAPESP.BITNET (01/03/91)
> prefer to go in the opposite direction, removing some of the syntax > that Forth already has (defining words have "one word lookahead" syntax, > and control structures have syntax). Syntax is an impediment to > extensibility, and the few syntactic constructs that Forth already > has frequently cause problems. What is your alternative to control structures? Get CFA from stack? I'm really insterested. > Mitch Bradley, wmb@Eng.Sun.COM (8-DCS) Daniel C. Sobral UNBCIC@BRFAPESP.BITNET