Re: [colorforth] ?dup

["John A. Peters" <japeters@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chuck Moore" <chipchuck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ColorForth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 11:49 PM
Subject: [colorforth] ?dup


> I agree that redefining standard Forth words is bad practice. But that's
> just one consideration, and in the heat of the moment can get overlooked.
>
> Perhaps the optimizing word  ?dup  could be renamed  /dup . The original
> mnemonic intention was: is a  dup  necessary? The new mnemonic would be:
> cancel  dup  if possible.
>
> That is, if present use isn't entrenched?
>
As an inventor and Win32Forth librarian, I think you should not pay any
attention to what has gone
before, except if it furthers your progress.  However, when you realize you
have done some thing like this, and that it is confusing to others, then
instead of changing it, use the energy to document it as a potential gotcha.
Note it in 2 or three places and you are done. After that, don't worry about
it,
carry on, keep doing what you have been doing, and while the dust settles.

If a client wants to pay you to change it, that is a different story.

John A. Peters

P.S.Please ignore my last message before this one - no content - hit the
send button by mistake.






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