From: do-not-use@swldwa.uk   
      
   On 15/07/2024 20:37, Ruvim wrote:   
   >   
   >>>   
   >>> RECURSIVE also allows you to tick the word in its own definition (not   
   >>> possible with RECURSE), a feature that I actually have used;   
   >   
   > I think, there should be a standard method to get the xt of the current   
   > definition (regardless whether it is a named definition, or nameless   
   > definition).   
   >   
      
   It can be done by using DEFER as a forward definition   
   e.g.   
   defer foo   
   :noname ... ['] foo defer@ ... ; is foo   
      
   using DEFER@ gives the xt of the code, omittimg it gives the xt of the name.   
      
   as FOO can be called by name by executing   
       synoname foo recurse   
   I would guess that your suggestion of FORWARD FOO could be defined using   
   that and something like EXECUTE-PARSING e.g. copying "FOO RECURSE" to a   
   buffer and doing:   
      BUF COUNT ' SYNONYM EXECUTE-PARSING   
   followed by IMMEDIATE of course   
      
   As DEFER can be used as a forward definition it can also be used for   
   mutual recursion   
      
   --   
   Gerry   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)