From: dxforth@gmail.com   
      
   On 8/02/2025 10:41 pm, Anton Ertl wrote:   
   > dxf  writes:   
   >> On 7/02/2025 4:20 am, Anton Ertl wrote:   
   >>> dxf  writes:   
   >>>> On 7/02/2025 12:59 am, minforth wrote:   
   >>>>> On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 12:57:12 +0000, Anton Ertl wrote:   
   >>>> AFAIR 200x nested definitions were justified on the grounds named   
   >>>> definitions were neither needed nor wanted   
   >>>   
   >>> Really?  There's a proposal to eliminate named definitions?  That's   
   >>> news to me.   
   >>   
   >> I didn't but clearly those that argued for quotations did.   
   >   
   > They did what?  Make a proposal for eliminating named definitions?   
   > Where can I find that proposal?  I was one of the proposers of   
   > quotations, so I certainly argued for them, and I am completely   
   > unaware of a proposal like you claim, neither from me, nor Alex   
   > McDonald (the first proposer of quotations), nor of anybody else   
   > arguing for quotations.  Please present evidence of such a proposal.   
      
   Let's not play semantics.  Quotations are promoting nameless definitions.   
      
   >> There's a case for having NONAME: which has no name and must pass an xt.   
   >   
   > Let's look at an example from the proposal:   
   >   
   > : hex. ( u -- )   
   >   base @ >r   
   >   [: hex u. ;] catch   
   >   r> base ! throw ;   
   >   
   > There is no good way for replacing the quotation here with NONAME:, so   
   > NONAME: is a red herring.   
      
   When was it necessary CATCH should operate on nameless definitions?  The   
   rationale for :NONAME was given in the ANS document.  I see nothing of   
   value in the example you quote.   
      
   >> This only strengthened my view forth quotations had nothing to offer but   
   >> namelessness.   
   >   
   > They also offer nesting.   
      
   They offer confusion since there's no name.  What language do you know where   
   nested definitions are nameless?  In Minforth's recent example he named the   
   quotation.  The only reason I can think is because a name made it readable!   
      
   I have used :NONAME and found it useful.  It's by no means an everyday thing -   
   indeed it's the exception.  I can't say the same about quotations - which   
   strike   
   me as being wrong in every way, not least because they are intended to feature   
   prominently, stuffed in one's face.  I don't understand the appeal at all.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)