In article ,   
   dxf   wrote:   
   >On 1/02/2025 6:50 pm, Anton Ertl wrote:   
   >> dxf  writes:   
   >>> If I use locals I'm more likely to   
   >>> use the ANS notation.  I notice Forth Inc does too - perhaps why they were   
   so   
   >>> adverse to conceding to { } .   
   >>   
   >> The reason why Forth, Inc. argued against { } is that they support an   
   >> existing code base that uses { } for comments; they use { } comments   
   >> extensively in SwiftForth, and their customers use it, too.  They   
   >> voted for {: :}, so they obviously don't have a problem with the   
   >> ordering of locals in {: :} (which is the same as for { }).   
   >   
   >IIRC FI was pressed hard for { } but they wouldn't budge.  It was odd   
   >since a single character to delimit a comment was inherently problematic.   
      
   You got that right. In a language like Forth or assembler, the only good   
   solution is a single character that runs until the end of line, such as   
    and \ .   
   DOC ENDDOC is used to comment pages of code, so that you cannot see it is   
   commented out bleh!   
      
   If your editor isn't capable to turn   
      
   : XXGCD   2DUP SWAP XGCD   ( A B D GCD )   
       DUP 0< IF NEGATE SWAP NEGATE SWAP THEN   
       DUP >R OVER >R          ( R: GCD D )   
       >R * R> SWAP - /         ( A B D GCD -- C )   
       R> R> ;   
      
   into   
      
   \ : XXGCD   2DUP SWAP XGCD   ( A B D GCD )   
   \     DUP 0< IF NEGATE SWAP NEGATE SWAP THEN   
   \     DUP >R OVER >R          ( R: GCD D )   
   \     >R * R> SWAP - /         ( A B D GCD -- C )   
   \     R> R> ;   
      
   and reverse it, get your money back.   
      
   >I find it hard to believe FI customers wouldn't have jumped at the chance   
   >to get a proper comment scheme and nicer looking locals syntax.  As it is   
   >now they're stuck with two lesser things.   
      
   Not hard to believe.   
   Changing millions of lines of code, for a dubious advantage.   
      
   >   
   >> Using WHERE LOCALS| in SwiftForth x64-Linux 4.0.0-RC89 only brings up   
   >> the definition of LOCALS|, but no uses.  "WHERE {:" brings up the   
   >> definition and 5 uses of "{:", all with more than one local; so they   
   >> obviously do not have a problem with the ordering of locals in {: :}.   
   >> Can you elaborate on what you have noticed?   
   >   
   >Interesting since...   
   >   
   >SwiftForth i386-Win32 3.11.9-RC1 01-Sep-2022   
   >   
   >85 matches for LOCAL|  (a few false positives in that)   
   >0  matches for {: :}   (despite being implemented)   
   >   
   LOCAL| apparently fit the bill. It still is standard. Why change?   
   If you have a large code base, uniformity is an advantage.   
      
   Groetjes Albert.   
   --   
   Temu exploits Christians: (Disclaimer, only 10 apostles)   
   Last Supper Acrylic Suncatcher - 15Cm Round Stained Glass- Style Wall   
   Art For Home, Office And Garden Decor - Perfect For Windows, Bars,   
   And Gifts For Friends Family And Colleagues.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)