Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 10:58:25 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org>, "Teske, Devin" <Devin.Teske@fisglobal.com> Subject: Re: Loader forth changes for customization Message-ID: <5283CBD1.9010606@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <A0800C10-2455-477C-A2DF-FBE5A6FE6F87@mail.turbofuzz.com> References: <5282E56F.4020307@freebsd.org> <52832003.8080406@freebsd.org> <09673101-DB54-4D25-9989-8C80D06E266B@fisglobal.com> <5283933E.30603@freebsd.org> <A0800C10-2455-477C-A2DF-FBE5A6FE6F87@mail.turbofuzz.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/13/13, 10:01 AM, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > On Nov 13, 2013, at 6:57 AM, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> It seems to work although I will talk to the team about making separate files for the set commands. > Since we’re talking about this, there is an old maxim amongst FORTH programmers that if a single word’s definition takes more than a page, it’s just too dang long. There are some solid reasons for that, namely the fact that forth is already hard enough to read as it is (and I’m speaking as a FAN of the language) and you generally need to keep the “internal stack state” in your head while writing a word since the stack contract is only at word boundaries (e.g. word is defined as tacking stack parameters foo and returning stack parameters bar). Keeping the definitions short and sweet really helps to aid in comprehension. > > The definition for draw-beastie currently violates that maxim, and if you guys were to refactor it as part of this work, I’m sure future generations would not object! :) I'll give that a shot shortly. -Alfred
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5283CBD1.9010606>