Re: RfD - Enhanced local variable syntax (long)

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:53:03 GMT, stephenXXX@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Stephen
Pelc) wrote:
>The following syntax for local arguments and local variables is
>proposed. The sequence:
>  { ni1 ni2 ... | lv1 lv2 ... -- o1 o2 }
>defines local arguments, local variables, and outputs. The local
>arguments are automatically initialised from the data stack on
>entry, the rightmost being taken from the top of the data stack.
>Local arguments and local variables can be referenced by name within
>the word during compilation. The output names are dummies to allow
>a complete stack comment to be generated.
>  The items between { and | are local arguments.
>  The items between | and -- are local variables or buffers.
>  The items between -- and } are outputs.

Some Forths use curly braces for multiline comments. instead of the
ugly 0 [IF]
I am comfortable with L( ... ) for defining locals. Also it resembles
the stack annotation. And as other posted, braces are hard to read.

I see problems with output locals. In my previous experiments I
noticed that they were seldom of practical use. 
: TEST  L( a -- o1 o2 )
  a to o1
  1
  a 2 + to o2 ;
0 TEST
Will the output be 1 0 2 or 0 2 1 ?

 
Andreas
-------
A computer is like an old Greek god, with a lot of rules and no mercy.