Proposal: BL rationale is wrong
This proposal has been moved into this section. Its former address was: /standard/core/BL
This page is dedicated to discussing this specific proposal
ContributeContributions
AntonErtl
[34] BL rationale is wrongProposal2017-10-25 11:35:46
Both Forth-2012 and Forth-94 specify ASCII as character encoding, so we know that the value of BL is #32 (or $20). The rationale claims that BL is the only way to get this value, but it is wrong.
BerndPaysan
Indeed, so we could move BL to core ext to make it optional.
There's no need for a size constrained system to contain a word that's trivially replaced by a literal with known value.
ruv
Yet another way to find the system value of "space" is : _BL ( -- c ) S" " DROP C@ ;
ruv
Due to a bug in the web-site engine, now it renders two spaces as one in an inline code fragment:
: _BL ( -- c ) S" " DROP C@ ;
\ It shows a string having length 0
S" "
\ instead of a string having length 1
S" "
(it works in code blocks, but doesn't work in inline code fragments)
AntonErtlNew Version: BL rationale is wrong
Both Forth-2012 and Forth-94 specify ASCII as character encoding, so we know that the value of BL is #32 (or $20). The rationale claims that BL is the only way to get this value, but it is wrong.
Replace the rationale of BL with:
BL(for BLank) indicates the intent of providing a character while the number#32or$20does not.
AntonErtl
This is just a wording change.