# 6.1.2170S>Ds-to-dCORE

( n -- d )

Convert the number n to the double-cell number d with the same numerical value.

## Testing:

T{       0 S>D ->       0  0 }T
T{       1 S>D ->       1  0 }T
T{       2 S>D ->       2  0 }T
T{      -1 S>D ->      -1 -1 }T
T{      -2 S>D ->      -2 -1 }T
T{ MIN-INT S>D -> MIN-INT -1 }T
T{ MAX-INT S>D -> MAX-INT  0 }T

## ruv[135] Word set of S>D wordRequest for clarification2020-05-29 10:10:51

Why `S>D` word is placed into CORE word set? What we can do with a double number (that `S>D` produces) without other words for double numbers?

It seems this word should be in Double-Number word set. What do you think?

### MarcelHendrix[r365] 2020-05-30 04:18:16

Didn't you forget about number formatting, interfacing with FM/MOD, SM/REM, REPOSITION-FILE and FILE-SIZE ?

### MarcelHendrix[r366] 2020-05-30 04:18:38

Didn't you forget about number formatting, interfacing with FM/MOD, SM/REM, REPOSITION-FILE and FILE-SIZE ?

### AntonErtl[r367] 2020-05-30 09:36:27

A quick (and possibly incomplete) search of words found the following words that take a d as input and do not require the double wordset to be present:

core: fm/mod sm/rem

float: d>f

Number conversion words and REPOSITION-FILE take an ud, so do not need S>D. Anyway, the words above seem to be good reasons for having s>d in core.

But in any case, it's water down the river. There is very little point in changing the wordset of a word in a later release. There is probably also little harm in this case, because most (all?) standard systems include double by default, but that reinforces the point that there is little point.

### StephenPelc[r468] 2020-09-02 21:10:07

The Technical committee has considered your submission.

The number conversion words <# # #S #> and friends require double numbers.

In order to use these words to display both single and double numbers S>D is required. Therefore we leave S>D in the CORE word set.

Closed