Should component words factored out from principal words be hidden?

[SirWumpus]

When principal word, for example SEE or DUMP, is factored down into component words, should those component words be subsequently hidden from search, unless they provide some generic function?

This is more a question for @ruv, but all opinions welcome.

[ruv]

The standard does not require hiding non-standard words. It is very likely that in a Forth system forth-wordlist contains many intermediate and system-specific words.

As an edge case example, the standard even does not prohibit a Forth system to provide a word like $fe in forth-wordlist, which prevents a program from using the numeric literal $fe.

---

Ideally, I would place only standard and well-known words in forth-wordlist.

Regarding other words, perhaps I would use something like:

• intermediate and private words in private-wordlst,
• system-specific words in system-wordlist,
• general Forth extensions in extension-wordlist.

To make such a layout convenient to implement and use, you will need some tools. For example, you might have decorators that place a synonym of the latest word in a specific word list, or move the latest definition into a specific word list.

: displace-latest-in ( wid -- ) ... ; \ this definition is system-dependent
: private ( -- ) private-wordlist displace-latest-in ;  \ move latest to private
: system ( -- ) system-wordlist displace-latest-in ;  \ move latest to system

Usage example:

private-wordlist system-wordlist forth-wordlist 3 set-order
definitions
\ NB: private-wordlist is in the search order

\ ...

/HOLD CHARS BUFFER: _pic  private
VARIABLE _>pic   private

\ ( char -- )
: HOLD _pic _>pic @ + C! 1 _>pic +! ;

Another approach is to use lexical blocks instead of decorators, something like:

private{
  /HOLD CHARS BUFFER: _pic
  VARIABLE _>pic
}private

\ ( char -- )
: HOLD _pic _>pic @ + C! 1 _>pic +! ;

There are other variants too.

[SirWumpus]

Thanks.

I wasn't planning to use multiple word lists for internal and extension (Post4) words. I don't think it buys me much (yet) and separating the built-in list into multiple I think would overly complicate the code. Though I'll keep it in mind for the future.

I was only concerned about the internal words that go into a standard word. Possibly about people thinking they can use the internal ones. I think of hiding words a little like C static vs extern.

[ruv]

An easy way is to completely remove the names of some words after using them. But accessing internal words is important for debugging, exploring, and create system-dependent Forth extensions. So, I would not remove the names completely.