NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/comp/lang/forth/3737

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-01 | 5.0 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!gatech!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu!pitt.edu!pitt!willett!FAQ
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Forth FAQ Answers: Part 91 (CASE,OF,ENDOF,ENDCASE).  (V1.0:01.Jan.93)
Message-ID: <4223.UUL1.3#[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (comp.lang.forth FAQ source)
Date: 2 Jan 93 00:39:47 GMT
Organization: EIEI-U
Lines: 122


  [This is a message that I thought deserved to be preserved.  -dwp]



    From: [e-mail] (Chuck Eaker)
    Subject: Re: Wanted .. CASE,OF,ENDOF,ENDCASE
    Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
    Date: 25 Nov 92 16:42:55 GMT

    In article <[e-mail]>,
        [e-mail] (Jack J. Woehr) writes:
    |> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
    |>
    |>
    |>
    |> >    Can anyone help with source ( masm/forth) to the CASE statement
    |> >    word set. I.E .... CASE OF ENDOF ENDCASE ....
    |>
    |>     Baden's CASE is in FORTH Dimensions VIII/5.
    |>
    |>     Eaker, who wrote and enduring CASE construct, checks into
    |> this newsgroup once and a while. Charles?
    |>
    |>         =jax=
    |> --
    |>  # jax@well.{UUCP,sf.ca.us}  # #  Member  # # Vice President,       #
    |>  # du!isis!koscej!jax        # # X3J14 TC # #  Forth Interest Group #
    |>  # JAX on GEnie              # # for ANS  # #   P.O. Box 8231       #
    |>  # SYSOP RCFB [phone] # #  Forth   # #    San Jose CA 95155  #

    1. FIG-Forth
    Here is the source for FIG-Forth published with the original article
    (Forth Dimensions, Vol. II, No. 3, pp. 37-40.). The ?PAIRS word was
    FIG-Forth's way of implementing a small amount of syntax checking.

     : CASE     ?COMP CSP @ !CSP 4 ; IMMEDIATE
     : OF       4 ?PAIRS COMPILE OVER COMPILE = COMPILE OBRANCH
            HERE 0 ,   COMPILE DROP  5 ; IMMEDIATE
     : ENDOF    5 ?PAIRS COMPILE BRANCH HERE 0 ,
            SWAP 2 [COMPILE] ENDIF 4 ; IMMEDIATE
     : ENDCASE  4 ?PAIRS COMPILE DROP
            BEGIN SP@ CSP @ = 0=
              WHILE 2 [COMPILE ENDIF REPEAT
            CSP ! ; IMMEDIATE

    1a. Here is additional source for FIG-Forth published in Forth
    Dimensions, Vol. III, No. 6, pp. 187-188 in an article by Alfred J.
    Monroe.  He adds a primitive compiled by OF which reduces the amount
    of code compiled by OF. Use the definitions of CASE, ENDOF, and
    ENDCASE given above.

     : (OF)     OVER = IF DROP 1 ELSE 0 ENDIF ;
     : OF       4 ?PAIRS COMPILE (OF) COMPILE 0BRANCH
            HERE 0 , 5 ; IMMEDIATE

    Mr. Monroe also gave code for some interesting variants:

     : (<OF)    OVER > IF DROP 1 ELSE 0 ENDIF ;
     : <OF      4 ?PAIRS COMPILE (<OF) COMPILE 0BRANCH
            HERE 0 , 5 ; IMMEDIATE
     : (>OF)    OVER > IF DROP 1 ELSE 0 ENDIF ;
     : >OF      4 ?PAIRS COMPILE (>OF) COMPILE 0BRANCH
            HERE 0 , 5 ; IMMEDIATE
     : RANGE    >R OVER DUP R> 1+ < IF SWAP 1- > IF DROP 1 ELSE 0
            ENDIF ELSE DROP DROP 0 ENDIF ;
     : RNG-OF   4 ?PAIRS COMPILE RANGE COMPILE 0BRANCH
            HERE 0 , 5 ; IMMEDIATE

    1b. It is quite common to define (OF) as a CODE word and have
    it combine the functions of the run-time (OF) and the compile-time
    0BRANCH in the previous definitions. This reduces the amount of
    compiled code even more.
     CODE (OF) ( 1. Remove the top element of the stack and call it A.
             2. If A equals the new top element of the stack,
                remove the new top element of the stack,
                skip over the branch vector, and execute
                the code which follows it.
            Else
                continue execution at the location indicated
                by the branch vector.
            ) END-CODE
     : OF      4 ?PAIRS COMPILE (OF) HERE 0 , 5 ; IMMEDIATE

    2. dpANS-3
    dpANS-3 contains the following definitions (p. 133) to illustrate
    control structure extension. Note that it would be quite easy to
    optimize OF along the lines suggested above. Note also that there is no
    syntax checking.  These words may appear anywhere and not necessarily
    combined with each other. In fact, ENDOF may be dispensed with entirely
    and replaced with ELSE. Compile-time monitoring of the syntax of
    control structure words is a perennial Forth problem.

     0 CONSTANT CASE IMMEDIATE  ( init count of OFs )

     : OF  ( #of -- orig #of+1 / x -- )
        1+    ( count OFs )
        >R    ( move off the stack in case the control-flow )
          ( stack is the data stack. )
        POSTPONE OVER  POSTPONE = ( copy and test case value )
        POSTPONE IF    ( add orig to control flow stack )
        POSTPONE DROP  ( discards case value if = )
        R> ;           ( we can bring count back now )
     IMMEDIATE

     : ENDOF  ( orig1 #of -- orig2 #of )
        >R    ( move off the stack in case the control-flow )
          ( stack is the data stack. )
        POSTPONE ELSE
        R> ;  ( we can bring count back now )
     IMMEDIATE

     : ENDCASE ( orig 1..orign #of -- )
        POSTPONE DROP  ( discard case value )
        0 ?DO
          POSTPONE THEN
        LOOP ;
     IMMEDIATE

    --
    Chuck Eaker / P.O. Box 8, K-1 3C12 / Schenectady, NY 12301 USA
    [e-mail]        [e-mail]       [phone]