Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!csn!ub!dsinc!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: ANS FORTH TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
Message-ID: <2293.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 30 Jan 91 12:14:21 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 50

Category 10,  Topic 2
Message 292       Mon Jan 28, 1991
GARY-S                       at 05:57 EST
 
    
  Casting a few votes:......

  In a message posted on GEnie by Dennis Ruffer, Elizabeth Rather asks:

 >?Regarding >COLROW, I'd really like to see a "show of hands" as to whether:

 - 1.  It should be removed altogether (it's not required, it's in CORE
       EXTENSIONS).
 - 2.  It should be kept as is.

   Either of the above would suit me. If it is item 1) though, I sure don't
   want to see a name change or description change. I realize the folks at
   FORTH Inc use a reverse stack notation, but all implementations I have
   ever used follow the LMI convention.

 >Regarding LEX, I personally would prefer to see the entire string wordset
 >go,

    This would be my vote. If you want string handlers, fine. Add them. Do
    NOT make them part of the core word set. I have no ax to grind with LEX,
    SED, or SNOBAL for that matter, just don't put them in my kernel.

 >RE moving 2DROP, 2DUP, 2OVER, 2SWAP, etc. to DOUBLE:  

     While I tend toward a minimal wordset I would personally hate to throw
     2DROP away. I could live without some of the others, but if the vote is
     'either all or none' I'd have to say keep the extended stack set.
 >RE a "portability" wordset with ALIGN etc.: 

     This question pits the side of me that wants portability against the
     side that wants a small, tight kernel. IF I HAD TO CHOSE THIS MINUTE
     I would opt for trashing it, but I would like to see the pros and 
     cons argued (rationally) first.
 >RE an Input Stream wordset with #TIB, etc.: 

     This one has been argued most eloquently by Dr. Wavrik, and he has 
     convinced me of the wisdom of his thinking. Count me in with the
     math professor at UCSD.

   That's all me votes for now. Gary
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You cannot Reply to the author
using email.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, whatever).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us or uunet!willett!dwp