Behavior of "compile,"

[ruv]

The interpretation semantics (IS) for compile, are undefined in Forth-94 and Forth-2012. It means that these semantics are implementation-defined (see also A.3.4.3.2). For example, it may be to perform the execution semantics (ES) of compile,, or it may be to throw an exception.

After a discussion in comp.lang.forth, I'm curious what interpretation semantics for compile, are preferable, and what interpretation semantics are usually provided by systems.

So, having the following code:

: foo 1 ;
: bar1 foo  ;
: bar2 [ ' foo compile, ] ;

Do you expect that the definition for bar2 should be equivalent to the definition for bar1?

The formal options are:

• (A) The IS for compile, are to perform the ES;
• (B) The IS for compile, are to throw an exception;

---

Each option will be posted consequently as a separate message.

Please use the following reactions to vote:

• 👍 +1 — I need this option (as a user).
• 👎 -1 — I don't want to provide this option (as a Forth system implementer).
• 🚀 rocket — I already provide this option in my system (as a Forth system implementer).

NB: multiple reactions are admissible.

[ruv]

(A) The IS for compile, are to perform the ES

[ruv]

(B) The IS for compile, are to throw an exception