[retroforth] Re: Request for Linux specific words
- From: aprice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: retroforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:14:43 -0800
>>> IMO a forth string ought to be returned. It is not the intention to
have
> zero-terminated strings in Forth. Although (smiling), if rf always
> automatically appends a zero, then calling system calls, is suddenly
> easy, and still compatible with Forth.
I agree. I also mentioned that appending-a-zero thing to Charles a while
ago,
I don't think he was receptive to the idea (but I'll be doing it in
Reva).<<
It seems to me that appending a zero is adding a tax (and complexity) to
every operation on strings. zstrings are a historical anomoly -- an
inefficient aberration that should be forgotten: therefore embedding
support for them more deeply than absolutely neccessary is a mistake. So I
concur with Charles here. :)
Andy
Andrew Price
C.T.O.
HealthSpace Integrated Solutions Ltd.
HealthSpace USA Inc.
Tel. (604) 860-4222
http://www.healthspace.com
"Ron Aaron" <ron@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: retroforth-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
01/20/05 10:59 AM
Please respond to
retroforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
retroforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
[retroforth] Re: Request for Linux specific words
On Thu, January 20, 2005 10:42, Ton ´t Lam said:
> IMO a forth string ought to be returned. It is not the intention to have
> zero-terminated strings in Forth. Although (smiling), if rf always
> automatically appends a zero, then calling system calls, is suddenly
> easy, and still compatible with Forth.
I agree. I also mentioned that appending-a-zero thing to Charles a while
ago,
I don't think he was receptive to the idea (but I'll be doing it in Reva).
--
My GPG public key is at http://ronware.org/
fingerprint: 8130 734C 69A3 6542 0853 CB42 3ECF 9259 AD29 415D
ForwardSourceID:NT0001536E
Other related posts:
