Re: [Amforth-devel] Deferred number?

[Matthias T. <mt...@we...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tom Harris wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> I am still trying to find my way around amforth, after a 20 year gap
> since I last used Forth. I have what I suspect is a stupid question.
> 
> On the Forth I last used I remember that the number word was vectored
> via a variable 'number, so that you could replace the number parser.
> Amforth does not use a deferred word for number, so it is not possible
> to replace number, is this correct? I can redefine number, but any
> previous usages of number, like the all-important quit word will still
> use the old definition. Is there a reason why number was not deferred
> like emit, key, pause, etc.?

emit/key and friends are deferred since they should easily
re-targettable from the serial to say can or I2C. For number
there was so such scenario. Why do you want to behave number
differently? A solution could be to CATCH conversion errors,
since number THROWs on them

Matthias
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIFVfh9bEHdGEMFjMRAjClAKCJqDErXIVFGpUqXJf8f2OLfYy1mgCgpSQL
SZ+Rb2gJc+9XJiXPjG1gPB8=
=Xizt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----