Naming of Standard words

"Charles Melice" <cm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:wMmdnWMioOpKOr7YRVnyvg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ...
> Perhaps the words RECORD: ... OFFSET: ... END-RECORD are
> betters names for the ANS proposal.

The following comment is less about the proposal and more about
the issue of word name choices - particularly when proposed for a
Standard.

The name STRUCT is typical of 'C'  where short-hand (cryptic?)
names are the norm.  Whereas forth standards have expressed the
goal that names be meaningful.

RECORD is a real english word and not too long.  But why the trend
of appending colons?  It wasn't done for CREATE VARIABLE etc.
If the structure's end was  ;RECORD  then perhaps but it further raises
the question of why everything has to look colon-like?

If the reasoning is that some long obsolete forth once used the name
RECORD etc andso we can't, then it is unfortunate.

When the ANS process began considerations of conflict with existing
forths had to be taken into account.  But it's been 20 years and the world
has changed.  If anyone still uses Forth-79 or 83 systems then clearly
they have no interest in, or need of, ANS-Forth.  Hence they are not
going to be upset if ANS happens to adopt a name that conflicts with
one theirs.  Forth standards should be using the best names available
- not ones which are compromised or second rate.

Perhaps forth now needs a new rule - "You can always do better than
add colons to names."  :)