Re: What's right with FORTH and wrong with c.l.f.

On May 1, 9:57=A0am, Jonah Thomas <jethom...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> The weakness I see is concatenating strings. You can use ALLOCATE and
> depend on the system that provides ALLOCATE to do decent garbage
> collection. Or you can copy both strings at HERE and trust you'll be
> able to -ALLOT the space at the right time.

> If the point is to send the string to a file or a pipe etc, you don't
> have to concatenate strings, just send all the parts in the right order.
> You can get by sending the first part as soon as you know it, and then
> you don't have to keep track of it.

However, if you are going to be doing further processing on the
string, that's when you need it.

The shuttlepad I am working on off and on is:

"S" for source string or else for substring string, or else for string
stack (your pick)
"T" for target string

STR>S ( ca u -- ) reset S, copy ( ca u ) into substring buffer
STR>T ( ca u -- ) reset T, copy ( ca u ) into target buffer
T>S ( -- ) reset S, copy contents of T into substring buffer
S>T ( -- ) reset T, copy contents of S into target buffer

split-S ( xt -- ) split contents of S into indexed substrings using
xt, which has
semantics of ( ca1 u1 -- ca2 u2 ) ca1 u1 is a remainder string, ca2 is
the address
following the end of the substring at the head of the remainder sring,
u2 is the
length of the substring separator

>concat$ ( ca u -- ) concatenaion seperator

T+STR ( ca u -- ) concatenates the STR (standard text representation)
on stack with T

+T ( i -- ) concatenates the i'th substring with T