|
|
comp.lang.forth |
> Why was it necessary to make this an ambiguous condition? > A general solution could be to require that a deferred (and standardized) IMO hooks such as you suggest shouldn't be mandated, but implementors Cheers, -- "Forth-based products and Services for real-time Marcel Hendrix wrote: I don't have any strong feelings about this particular instance of an
> Peter Knaggs <pkna...@bournemouth.ac.uk> wrote Re: RfD: Escaped Strings S\" (version 5)
> [..]
>> Translation rules:
>> Characters are processed one at a time and appended to the
>> compiled string. If the character is a '\' character it is
>> processed by parsing and substituting one or more characters
>> as follows, where the character after the backslash is case
>> sensitive:
>> \a BEL (alert, ASCII 7)
> [..]
>> \\ backslash itself
>> \ An ambiguous condition exists if a \ is placed before any
>> character, other than those defined in 6.2.xxxx S\".
> [..]
> S\" is not used by any systems not represented in the Forth 200x effort.
> IMHO it is a bit silly (for a standards effort) not to mention all \<char>
> codes in use today, and/or to allow future vendor-specific extensions that
> will break portability of code and require work-arounds.
> hook word is executed in case an unknown code is encountered. This would
> guarantee that any future S\" problems can be fixed by user code.
> Thinking this through should convince most people that simply forbidding
> non-standard \-codes is by far preferable.
"ambiguous condition", but want to suggest that a more appropriate way
of looking at it is that the proposed standard would *guarantee* success
with the listed codes, but make no guarantees about others. That's a
more positive view than saying that codes not on the list are
"forbidden". In general, that's how most "ambiguous conditions" are
intended: some, of course, are errors, but others are merely cases in
which no specific behavior is mandated.
who see a need or value can provide them.
Elizabeth
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc. +1 310-491-3356
5155 W. Rosecrans Ave. #1018 Fax: +1 310-978-9454
Hawthorne, CA 90250
http://www.forth.com
applications since 1973."
==================================================