Re: BETWEEN

On Mar 12, 2:54 pm, Jonah Thomas <jethom...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Yes.

So in that case, is a ****table definition of BETWEEN using WITHIN:

\ ( value lower-bound upper-bound -- fl=[lower<=value<upper?] )
: BETWEEN ( u1|n1 u2|n2 u3|n3 -- fl ) 1+ 2DUP = >R WITHIN R> OR ;

That will also fix the same problem that strikes for signed numbers
when the BETWEEN lower bound is the most negative number and the
BETWEEN upper bound the most positive.

And just like WITHIN, if it looks like the lower bound is bigger than
the upper bound, you meant to run around the number wheel.

If:

0 3 2 WITHIN

yields TRUE, surely

0 3 2 BETWEEN

should yield TRUE? The definition above does (I checked it in the
space right after "TRUE?" ... the "1+ WITHIN" definition does not.


And then if WITHIN is coded, BETWEEN inherits most of the efficiency
without the boundary problem.