From Newsgroup: comp.lang.misc
In article <v08bu7$1kl1e$
1@dont-email.me>,
Richard Harnden <
richard.harnden@invalid.com> wrote:
On 18/04/2024 10:31, David Brown wrote:
On 18/04/2024 10:36, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 10:30:49 +0200, David Brown wrote:
With the list of pointers design of Forth, you can just
redefine these "local" words as you need to, and ignore any previous
definitions.
So, they reinvented local variables, and thought it was some great
innovation ...
"word" in Forth terminology is more like "function" in common imperative
languages. (It is not exactly the same, since Forth "words" are much
more flexible - that is both a good thing and a bad thing.)
Why not include c.l.forth?
And maybe change the Subject title?
--
The randomly chosen signature file that would have appeared here is more than 4 lines long. As such, it violates one or more Usenet RFCs. In order to remain in compliance with said RFCs, the actual sig can be found at the following URL:
http://user.xmission.com/~gazelle/Sigs/RepInsults
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114