Re: [Amforth] amforth-shell.py

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

Hi Enoch,


> When cleaning up my code to make it uploadable through the minicom
> plugin as well I noted that commented #include's are not recognized by
> the shell (though promised). Below is a patch that straightens things
> up.

Many thanks for it.

> 
> Also, I seek confirmation that amforth will not change it's single line
> only ( comment ) behavior

As I understand the forth standard, a multiline ( ) comment is only
available for file content (section 11 of the standard text). Otherwise
a "parse area" is used to detect the closing ). If the parsing
area is exhausted, a refill is not requested, leaving a somewhat
strange state IMHO.

A small test with gforth gave me the following

mt@ayla:~$ gforth
Gforth 0.7.0, Copyright (C) 1995-2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Gforth comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `license'
Type `bye' to exit
( foo   ok
bar )
:2: Undefined word
>>>bar<<< )
Backtrace:
$7F7DAC7B4A68 throw
$7F7DAC7CACE0 no.extensions
$7F7DAC7B4D28 interpreter-notfound1

The same "program" from a file works fine

mt@ayla:~$ cat test.fs
( foo
  bar )
mt@ayla:~$ gforth test.fs
Gforth 0.7.0, Copyright (C) 1995-2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Gforth comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `license'
Type `bye' to exit
bye
mt@ayla:~$

I'd recommend using ( comments ) on a single line basis only.
That seems to be a save bet for all systems. Its not impossible
that amforth gets the multiline comments on the commmand prompt,
I'd not hold my breath waiting however ;)

Matthias