Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Desktop Forth system requirements #83

Open
ruv opened this issue Jan 23, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Desktop Forth system requirements #83

ruv opened this issue Jan 23, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@ruv
Copy link
Contributor

ruv commented Jan 23, 2020

I suggest to figure out some conventional requirements to the desktop Forth systems.
See the initial version at wiki. Please, share you ideas.

@iru-
Copy link

iru- commented Jan 23, 2020

Regarding the points you described on the wiki page, I agree with most of them. Some minor comments:
4. Agreed, and why care about the nature of standard input at all?
6.i What about processing a single file? If you need multiple files to be included, write a load file and include it.
6.ii can be removed, (4) takes care of that.
6.iii and iv can be removed in favor of forth words that do the same and are called from a pipeline.

My comments are only opinions, of course. No hard truth about them.

By the way, @ruv's ideas plus my comments are mostly implemented in nop.

@ruv
Copy link
Contributor Author

ruv commented Jan 27, 2020

  1. Some forth systems don't pass the mentioned testcase: echo "2 3 + . " | forth.
    OTOH, pipe in STDIN means batch mode, so a Forth system should be quiet. It is useful for scripting. Sometimes the output should be fully controlled by a script.

  2. The idea is to have not a minimal API, but to have a conventional API.
    It it common for the script engines to accept a file in the command line, and even several files.
    Also, "help" and "version" options are well known and wide supported (it certainly does not exclude words like help and version).

Regarding nop system — it could be more useful if it would be closer to the standard Forth.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants