Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: TCOM & DEFERRED WORDS
Message-ID: <201.UUL1.3#5129@willett.UUCP>
Date: 5 Jan 90 20:44:06 GMT
Organization: Latest Link in ForthNet Chain
Lines: 36


 Date: 01-02-90 (19:52)              Number: 2744 (Echo)
   To: KENNETH O'HESKIN              Refer#: 2731
 From: ZAFAR ESSAK                     Read: NO
 Subj: TCOM & DEFERRED WORDS         Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE

 Thanks for your comments on Zimmer's TCOM.  In response to your 
 remarks about Deferred words, 

 KO'H> Deferred words ... are largely a programmer's convenience during 
       development 

 KO'H> there are other ways to handle runtime revectoring 

 I can think of other ways to handle runtime revectoring but I can also 
 come up with a number of uses for deferred words that aren't just for 
 convenience during development.  It seems somewhat reminescent of 
 discussions on this board several months or more ago, about vectored 
 execution words.  The concept of vector variables, wherever it 
 originated from certainly offers simplicity and would probably work 
 both with F-PC and TCOM.  For example: 

 VARIABLE 'chameleon ( --adr) 

 : chameleon ( --) 'chameleon @execute ; 

 : yellow.chameleon ( --) yellow 'chameleon ! ; 

 etc. 
 ---
  * Via Qwikmail 2.01

 NET/Mail : British Columbia Forth Board - Burnaby BC - (604)434-5886   
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated program.
Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'