[448] 2026-09-12 15:19:31 ruv wrote:

referenceImplementation - Udate reference implementation for `ALSO`

The original reference implementation does not handle the case where the search order is empty.

: ALSO ( -- )
    GET-ORDER DUP 0= IF -50 THROW THEN
    OVER SWAP 1+ SET-ORDER
;

NB: the search order overflow should be checked in set-order. See also: the section 16.4.1.2 Ambiguous conditions, Table 9.1, and contribution #447.

[r1757] 2026-09-12 07:09:17 BerndPaysan replies:

proposal - New words: latest-name and latest-name-in

If I have the case of a data type needs checking and throwing if it's not correct, I usually create a word that throws on error:

: ?nt ( nt|0 -- nt ) \ throws on nt=0
    dup 0= -80 and throw ;

Then the cases where there needs to be a check can have that check, and it's a short word to insert, e.g.

: immediate ( -- ) immediate-mask latest-name ?nt >flags or! ;

[r1758] 2026-09-12 15:06:02 ruv replies:

requestClarification - What should happen when calling ALSO when the search order is empty?

I don't understand what would happen if the search order is empty.

This is an implicit ambiguous condition: it should obviously have been declared, but was likely overlooked.

The Table 9.1 contains a throw code -50 search-order underflow.

[r1759] 2026-09-12 17:16:11 ruv replies:

proposal - New words: latest-name and latest-name-in

: ?nt ( nt|0 -- nt ) \ throws on nt=0
    dup 0= -80 and throw ;

In that case, what is the error message? Note that we already have ?found ( x1\0 -- x1 ^^ 0 -- never ).

Then the cases where there needs to be a check can have that check, and it's a short word to insert,

This approach is useful when you sometimes need to handle 0 locally, while in other cases you need to throw an exception. For latest-name, there is almost no use cases where you need to handle 0 locally (please, provide examples if you have). And in very rare cases where you need to handle 0 locally, I suggest to use another word.

---

To avoid similarity in names when the stack effect is not similar, I suggest to change the naming as follows:

last-name-in ( wid -- nt|0 ) \ It is needed as a basic API method 
last-name ( -- nt|0 )  \ It is very optional, since it is almost not needed in practice
latest-name ( -- nt ) \ It is used in most practical use cases

Is it acceptable for you?