Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!texbell!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: X3J14's BASIS10 def'n for LEAVE Message-ID: <5W31_J7xds13@ficc.uu.net> Date: 16 Jan 90 19:02:39 GMT References: <268.UUL1.3#5129@willett.UUCP> Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 18 > As I understand BASIS10, LEAVE will work as follows: > DO .... LEAVE ... DO ... LOOP (b) ... LOOP (c) ... > |--------------------^ > that is, it will jump to point (b) instead of point (c). > WHY? Surely LEAVE should work the same whether or not the inner DO...LOOP > is explicit or whether it is part of another word... ...or even whether it exists at all. I agree, this definition seems pretty looney-tunes. The only rationale I can see for this is that it might make metacompiling with a non-stack-based metacompiler a fraction easier. Surely this isn't what's meant. Could it be a typo or an overly strict reading of the standard? Over in comp.std.c such things often turn out to be erroneous. -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. . / \ \_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure! v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'