Re: [colorforth] abort

["t" <loveall@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2 Jun 2003 10:07:13 -0700
"Chuck Moore" <chipchuck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Abort  generates indecision in my mind. I'm disturbed by all the words in
> ANSI Forth and have tried to minimize them.
> 
> The concept of  catch  and  throw  are an example. They seem to emphasize
> the importance of errors. Much better to eliminate the possibility of error
> than to compensate for it. So I left out  abort.
> 
> As a consequence, I sometimes have a crash that I could have avoided. On the
> other hand, if I can detect an error I can correct it. Or at least do
> something plausible rather than aborting.
> 
> Perhaps it's time we made computers more intelligent.

For a completely closed system that has all 'native' data that is completely
acceptable. Proper input validation and range checking guarantees that there
are no errors to process. The colorForth input editor does an acceptable job
as well as the OKAD user interface.

However, for an application that uses 'foreign' generated data, especially
high level abstractions, 'Abort', 'catch' and 'throw', 'divide by zero' checks
and whatever else you can think of are all required. Case in point would be a
simple HTML processor with graphic image displayer. There is definitely a need
to detect bad as well as missing syntax in order to recover to a known state
and continue with the overall operation.

Regards,
Terry Loveall

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: colorforth-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: colorforth-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Main web page - http://www.colorforth.com