2022-02-03 08:04:35 joe9: The last section in Thinking FORTH (free PDF available from forth.com, comes with swiftforth and might be a separate download too) 2022-02-03 08:04:51 is on naming conventions, they list both !word and word! as possibilities 2022-02-03 08:05:14 Their examples are !data and b! so maybe they prefer prefix with ! for longer names? 2022-02-03 08:05:24 I don't know, I personally use word! consistently 2022-02-03 08:14:45 veltas, thanks. 2022-02-03 08:15:14 someone is working on the latest version of thinking forth. Do you if he hangs out in this channel? 2022-02-03 08:28:10 I don't know 2022-02-03 08:28:46 For me word! makes sense because it roughly replaces `word !` 2022-02-03 08:29:00 The same way `2/` replaces `2 /` etc 2022-02-03 09:30:50 yes, I like to think the same way too. 2022-02-03 09:34:45 Starting to find I just turn syntax highlighting off all the time 2022-02-03 09:35:07 It's mildly useful when it works, and so incredibly distracting when it's wrong, and I find I don't really need it 2022-02-03 09:47:44 that is what sam/acme do 2022-02-03 09:55:48 does anyone else find it funny that ANS forth includes a "forth" word? 2022-02-03 09:57:13 does the highlighting not work that well? 2022-02-03 10:29:01 I plan to write forth stuff to create documents in this format https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/devnet/pdf/pdfs/PDF32000_2008.pdf 2022-02-03 10:29:14 Probably will be my first big project after writing my x86-64 forth 2022-02-03 10:29:44 That and HTML I guess 2022-02-03 10:30:07 We need a forth replacement for TeX/troff 2022-02-03 10:32:53 MrMobius: I don't think you can do 'good' forth highlighting, my vim highlighter was a pretty reasonable attempt 2022-02-03 10:32:57 But I don't want to use it 2022-02-03 10:33:11 And likewise vim can't even highlight C properly 2022-02-03 10:57:20 why not, veltas 2022-02-03 10:57:42 Why not what? 2022-02-03 14:03:16 veltas: I escaped the *roff rabbit hole, I'll stick with LaTeX for now 2022-02-03 14:03:47 I might use for things other than books, though 2022-02-03 16:48:41 i think i found a way to write `exit` in sectorforth, similar to `r>`, so it doesn't have to be a primitive 2022-02-03 18:07:30 yup 2022-02-03 18:08:09 `exit` doesn't need to be a primitive in sectorforth, you can write it by fiddling with the return stack directly 2022-02-03 18:08:19 that saves some bytes! :-)