Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.lang.forth    |    Forth programmers eat a lot of Bratwurst    |    117,927 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 117,266 of 117,927    |
|    dxf to Hans Bezemer    |
|    Re: Why dial-a-standard is not a thing i    |
|    01 May 25 11:23:53    |
      From: dxforth@gmail.com              On 30/04/2025 11:58 pm, Hans Bezemer wrote:       > On 30-04-2025 04:37, dxf wrote:       >> On 30/04/2025 2:50 am, Hans Bezemer wrote:       >>> ...       >>> To force myself to add messages to THROWs (especially in libs with special       conditions) I added THROW" - it works like a combination of ABORT" and THROW.       You need to specify a THROW code, you need to specify a flag and you need to       specify a message.       >>       >> What happens in the case of CATCH - what's left on the stack?       >>       > Surprise, surprise - THROW" calls THROW (actually, it inlines the whole       shebang). So - what do you think?              For ABORT" the string is suppressed and only the code (-2) is left.       Is that what THROW" does with the string?              AFAIK on most forth systems exceptions generate either an error code or an       error message (the latter via ABORT" or caught code). In short, what good       is having both a msg and a code?              --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca