Re: Creating and using arrays - again

I've always liked that the normal behavior of variable data in Forth
is to leave its address on the stack. In most cases I eventually end
up going back and refactoring a CREATE DOES> construct into two
separate words by naming the former DOES> part promoting it to a full-
fledged word on its own. I end up with two words, two names, for two
behaviors, which seems natural to me. I can of course add myriad other
behaviors by creating other words that take an address parameter.

My impression is that whether one perceives DOES> as a necessity in
Forth has more to do with one's factoring style than anything else.

An area where I've used CREATE DOES> constructs a lot is in writing
Forth assemblers, but in that particular case they're acting more as
edit-time macros to save me keystrokes. I'm thinking they're might be
a more natural way to take care of that particular task than using
CREATE DOES>, since  edit-time macros are inherently disposable.