do loop, strange behavior

[Jan Kromhout]

We wont to use the doloop for the scamp3 and find this after testing:

: testloop cr 10 0 do i . cr loop ;   ok

testloop
32758
32758
32758
32758
32758
32758
32758
32758
32758
32758
ok

Using this version : flashforth/pic24/forth/doloop.fs
Are we do sommeting wring?

Thanks for any help

[Mikael Nordman]

I think the problem is that John has in the scamp defined the word I to work with FOR/NEXT as:

: i r@ ; 

That prevents the the word I for DO/LOOP to be defined and the wrong I will be used.
I believe I asked John not to do this back in 2018, but he did it anyway.

You can get around this by changing doloop.fs to define I with another name, II for example.