Re: [colorforth] DOES> How is colorForth different from other Forths?

["Chuck Moore" <chipchuck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I want to minimize syntatical constructs as part of my quest to simplify
computers and programming. Simple is not necessarily better. Human beings
seem to prefer a certain amount of complexity in their lives. However, when
things get extraordinarily complex, costs and unintended consequences
balloon.

DOES> distinguishes between code executed at compile time and that executed
at run time. That is a very powerful and useful distinction.

ColorForth makes that distinction with macros (immediate words). And OKAD
allows specifying code that is executed at define time - equivalent to the
code between CREATE and DOES>.

ColorForth also specifies code executed at edit/display time by having a
different tag table.

I like this concept of different times for the same word. It's like the
functions associated with objects. Except that it's associated with the
context instead of the object. So far I distinguish: display time, edit
time, compile time, define time and run time. Are there more.

Incidently, I"m making progress with colorForth 2.0, defined in colorForth.


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