Proposal: Reword the term "execution token"

Formal

This page is dedicated to discussing this specific proposal

ContributeContributions

AntonErtlavatar of AntonErtl Reword the term "execution token"Proposal2020-09-03 11:55:03

Author:

M. Anton Ertl

Change Log:

Problem:

The definition of the term "execution token" does not match its usage in FIND.

Solution:

Change the wording of the definition of the term to match the usage.

Proposal:

In Section 2.1, change:

execution token: A value that identifies the execution semantics of a definition.

into

execution token: A value that identifies code that can be EXECUTEd, e.g., for the interpretation semantics of a word.

ruvavatar of ruv

Do you consider using the "execution token" term in all other places? Or only in the glossary for FIND?

What is a rationale to change this term instead of making correction in FIND?

It seems to me, the "execution token" term is excellent as identifier of execution semantics.

  1. A "code that can be EXECUTEd" is actually some definition.

definition: A Forth execution procedure compiled into the dictionary.

One anonymous definition can perform interpretation semantics for other named definition.

  1. The wording "can be EXECUTEd" seems to be far from the language of standard.

AntonErtlavatar of AntonErtl

Yes, it's exactly because I consider all the places where xt occurs that I think it's inadequate to restrict xt to only refer to execution semantics. On the producer side, ' ['], NAME>INTERPRET, NAME>COMPILE come into my mind from the top of my head. On the consumer side, EXECUTE and COMPILE, should not be limited to performing execution semantics. With a restricted xt, you would have to work around that by revising at least all the producers.

xt will continue to be an identifier of execution semantics. With the new wording we can also identify other semantics, and actually the standard has done that all along; it's just that the definition of the term "execution token" did not fit with that usage. This proposal is proposing to fix that.

The wording of the new definition has been hashed out in the committee meeting and I will post a new version of the proposal with the new wording soon.

AntonErtlavatar of AntonErtlNew Version

Hide differences

Author:

M. Anton Ertl

Change Log:

2020-09-03 Hashed out the new wording in a committee meeting.

Problem:

The definition of the term "execution token" does not match its usage in FIND.

The definition of the term "execution token" does not match its usage in FIND, ', ['], NAME>INTERPRET, NAME>COMPILE.

Solution:

Change the wording of the definition of the term to match the usage.

Proposal:

In Section 2.1, change:

execution token: A value that identifies the execution semantics of a definition.

into

execution token:

A value that identifies code that can be EXECUTEd, e.g., for the interpretation semantics of a word.

A value that identifies executable code.

Formal
Reply New Version