Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!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: <2636.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 16 Apr 91 02:14:54 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 40

Category 10,  Topic 2
Message 143       Sun Apr 14, 1991
B.RODRIGUEZ2 [Brad]          at 17:26 EDT
 
> : DEFER  CREATE ['] COMPLAIN ,  DOES> @ EXECUTE ;

>> Can it use TO?

> No.  There is no standard way to tell an existing system
 > implementation of TO how to recognize children of the new
 > defining word "DEFER,"...

Indeed, can the parameter field of the DEFERred word be changed at all?  My
first thought was something like,

   : IS   ['] >BODY ! ;
   [']  word-name  IS  deferred-word

but I've been looking at Section 5.3.2, Addressable Memory, in my BASIS13
(sorry, I'm two BASES -- BASISes? -- behind), and I'm getting mixed signals. 
One clause seems to say that this is not permissible, another says that it is.
Is the word IS as given above valid ANS Forth?  And would someone please
clarify the BASIS in this regard?

- Brad

P.S. to Zarko Berberski: you have erroneously attributed to Robert Berkey one
of my postings, and have accused him of inconsistency thereby.  For the
record, _I_ was the one who posted the Datamation reference.  BTW, is it your
contention that "users" cannot be "experts"?

Brad Rodriguez        | brad%candice@maccs.uucp      (God willing)
 B.RODRIGUEZ2 on GEnie | brad%candice@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca
 "Shoes for industry!" | bradford@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca  (archaic)

-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp