Digest #234 2023-09-24
A citation from the Discussion section (in r1079):
On the data stack
x_n ... x_1 +nbecause that is the way we usually specify a numbered number of cells (even for
+n=0). See, e.g.,
So the question is: why is
+n used in the stack diagrams for
nr> instead of
What's wrong with DEFER foo bla bla :noname <code for foo> ; IS foo No additional name needed.
Form a readability point of view, "additional name" doesn't mean a dictionary entry, but additional mention of the name.
And, in the case of mutual recursion, this looks differ:
defer FOO : BAR ( ... -- ... ) bla bla FOO bla bla ; :noname ( ... -- ... ) bla bla BAR bla bla ; is FOO
What's wrong is poor readability. Since at the begin of the second definition it's unclear what is it for.
I can add a comment at the begin of this anonymous definition:
:noname ( ... -- ... ) \ the word "FOO" bla bla BAR bla bla ; is FOO
Such a comment is not elegant. And moreover, by that I introduce additional mention of the name