Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!world!dcp
From: dcp@world.std.com (David C. Petty)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: ANS FORTH TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
Keywords: ANS Forth
Message-ID: <1991Mar11.041202.7339@world.std.com>
Date: 11 Mar 91 04:12:02 GMT
References: <2404.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Reply-To: dcp@world (David C. Petty)
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die
Lines: 22

In article <2404.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>,
RAY DUNCAN writes:

`` It seems sort of silly to me to put something into the
`` ANSI Forth draft standard --- which is supposed to be founded on
`` concensus and common practice --- which will totally break the code of
`` thousands of serious Forth programmers and CANNOT be mechanically
`` edited/translated from old to new.

Hear, hear.  To me it is worse than silly.  It is insidious.  But that
is not the first time, nor will it be the last.  By the way, I know
that ONLY and ALSO were removed to the extension word set, but that is
not far enough removed for me.  I also know that there is a lot of
discussion to the effect that SAVE-ORDER and RESTORE-ORDER (or
whatever they're called) will ``fix'' the search order word set.
Let's let them become accepted practice and then we'll find out!

-- 
 David C. Petty | dcp@world.std.com | ...!{uunet,bu.edu}!world!dcp /\
      POBox Two | CIS: 73607,1646   | BIX, Delphi, MCIMail: dcp   /  \
 Cambridge,  MA | `It must've been some-other-body,              /    \
02140-0001  USA |  uh uh babe it wasn't me...'                  /______\