From: ruvim.pinka@gmail.com   
      
   On 2024-09-18 07:39, dxf wrote:   
   > On 18/09/2024 4:58 am, Anthony Howe wrote:   
   >> On 2024-09-17 07:59, Ruvim wrote:   
   >> ...   
   >>> I think, the standard conformance test suite is enough.   
   >>   
   >> One would think so, but the test suite is:   
   >>   
   >> * incomplete   
   >   
   > As is the standard generally.  It's also dated.  It's no coincidence   
   > vendors provided functionality well beyond what ANS specified.   
      
   Some words that cannot be implemented in a standard program should be   
   standardized, for example, sockets, multitasking, and perhaps FFI.   
      
   But libraries (except some most basic ones) should not be a part of the   
   Forth language standard, I think.   
      
      
   > Since   
   > these extensions were never coordinated, there's no common practice   
   > and thus no consensus.  Neither are willing to risk customer backlash   
   > on what is essentially a dead idea.   
      
      
   > Their role on the TC is to ensure   
   > nothing jeopardizes their investment.  It's impossible to have spent   
   > 20 years 'standardizing' and have achieved so little.   
      
   This critics is absolutely fruitless. No one owes you to develop any   
   specifications unless you pay for it. Whether some people have achieved   
   much or little is their own business.   
      
   Do you have any specific proposals? If this bothers you, why not get   
   involved? Or why not develop some specifications independently?   
      
      
   > For fans only.   
      
   This is not a paid job. You have to be a fan to do this.   
      
      
      
   --   
   Ruvim   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)