In article <2025Nov21.091552@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>,
Anton Ertl wrote:
>Paul Rubin writes:
>>dxf writes:
>>> When you say 'get around it', do you mean a broken line?
>>
>>The trouble distinguishing between a broken and an unbroken line when
>>u1=line length.
>
>There is no such trouble in standard systems. Such a line will be
>broken on such a system.
The kernel system is of low quality if it insists on the language
design standard of the 70 such as frozen in CORE.
QUIT uses (ACCEPT) in ciforth:
( -- sc )
Accept characters from the terminal, until a RET is received and
return the result as a constant string sc. It doesn't contain any
line ending, but the buffer still does and after 1+ the string ends
in a LF. The editing functions are the same as with ACCEPT .
The buffer (and the resulting string) is limited to 16 K characters.
[Note that this is exact fitting documentation, an msdos ciforth
show a 64 char limit and 2 + to contain the strings end. ]
With this and EXECUTE-PARSING or equivalent functionality the
problems as sketched vanished.
(ACCEPT) is as it where a redesigned READ-LINE leaning on the concept
of a string constant ( addr len -- ) where the area that is passed
is non-writable.
>
>>The deficiency in the standard is not
>>explaining READ-LINE's exact behaviour in this situation.
>
>The behaviour is specified exactly:
>
>|If a line terminator was received before u1 characters were read, then
>|u2 is the number of characters, not including the line terminator,
>|actually read [...]. When u1 = u2 the line terminator has
>|yet to be reached.
The problem is that it builds on the 70' CORE and idea's. It is akward.
>- anton
Groetjes Albert
--
The Chinese government is satisfied with its military superiority over USA.
The next 5 year plan has as primary goal to advance life expectancy
over 80 years, like Western Europe.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
