6.1.0770 BL b-l CORE

If it is so somple to implement, should it really be in the standard?

BL is more readable than $20, just as CHAR * is more readable than 42.

But is it necessary to have BL in core?

The rationale is written for an encoding-independent standard, but the standard ('94 and 2012) specifies that we use ASCII-compatible encodings, so we actually do have a way to do without BL (not as readable, but still).

It's always handy to have readable references for things like TAB, CR, LF, ESC, etc. This word could be optional, but it's certainly handy.

BL has been in Forth since 1976, the rational in the '79 document is:

Leave the ASCII character value for blank (decimal 32).

It was originally included as you can not use CHAR or [CHAR} to obtain the value. We have kept it in the standard for backward compatibility.

If you must have a reference implementation, I would use:

DECIMAL 32 CONSTANT BL

Particularly given the prefix notations are optional.

AFAICS, number prefixes are obligatory in Forth-2012, so either reference implementation is ok.

Thank you for your example, it is deemed valid and therefor closed.

Hayes' core.fr starts with HEX. Now that we have standardized number prefixes, we could use number prefixes (e.g., $20) to eliminate this dependence on BASE.

I think, regardless other third party files, numbers in the specification should be in decimal by default. The test suit from Annex F restores BASE after loading.

Also, in other places the decimal radix is implied. E.g. the tests for +LOOP.