[Amforth] Variations on .S (was: .S “dot-s”)

[Erich W. <ew....@na...>]

Hi,

On 03/02/2013 06:22 AM, Enoch wrote:
> Hello Matthias&  all,
> 
> Regarding .S
> 
> Indeed, says Forth 2012 RC1, "the format of the display is
> implementation-dependent".
> 
> However, doesn't GFORTH display order make a better sense:
> 
> 1 2 3 .s<3>  1 2 3  ok
> 
> While ours:
> 
>> 1 2 3 .s
> 3 2 1  ok
> 

One of the great things on Forth imho is that you can make
the system do, what your eyes please. So a few variations
on " .s " :


\ variations on dot-s
\ dot-s, one way, signed output:
: ds  sp@ sp0 1 cells - do i @  . -2 +loop ;

\ dot-s, one way, unsigned output:
: uds sp@ sp0 1 cells - do i @ u. -2 +loop ;

\ dot-s, the other way (reverse?), signed output:
: rs  sp@ sp0      swap do i @  .  2 +loop ;

\ dot-s, the other way, unsigned output:
: urs sp@ sp0      swap do i @ u.  2 +loop ;

\ dot-s, verbose, as it used to be in earlier versions of amforth:
:  dsv  depth dup 0 do i u. dup i - cells sp0 swap - dup u. @  . cr loop ;
: udsv  depth dup 0 do i u. dup i - cells sp0 swap - dup u. @ u. cr loop ;

And watch the show:

	|> .s
	|65530 5 4 3 2 1  ok
	|> ds
	|1 2 3 4 5 -6  ok
	|> uds
	|1 2 3 4 5 65530  ok
	|> hex uds
	|1 2 3 4 5 FFFA  ok
	|> rs
	|-6 5 4 3 2 1  ok
	|> urs
	|65530 5 4 3 2 1  ok
	|> dsv
	|0 1539 -6
	|1 1541 5
	|2 1543 4
	|3 1545 3
	|4 1547 2
	|5 1549 1
	| ok
	|>

Just never assume that your preferred solution solves the same
problem for everyone else. I read words/depth.asm for enlightenment,
and I chose the above without using pick, because pick needs to be
added to the dictionary. Obviously there is more than one way to
do this. You may *want* error checking. I don't. If I do a mistake,
well I excuse the system for crashing.

Cheers,
Erich