Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site graffiti.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!graffiti!peter
From: peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: net.lang.lisp,net.lang.forth
Subject: Re: OPS-5 sa question ??? (and FORTH hint)
Message-ID: <403@graffiti.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Nov-85 23:10:28 EST
Article-I.D.: graffiti.403
Posted: Sun Nov  3 23:10:28 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Nov-85 06:39:00 EST
References: <16700005@uiucuxc>, <312@uwai.UUCP> <1015@raybed2.UUCP>
Organization: The Power Elite, Houston, TX
Lines: 20
Xref: linus net.lang.lisp:549 net.lang.forth:277

One thing I did when working on a forth project under UNIX was to define
a word "new_forth":

: new_forth
  fork if
    wait drop ." Parent" CR
  else
    ." Child" CR
  then ;

Where fork and wait have their usual meanings (people with my UNIX variant of
John James' FIG-forth might want to try this... it's useful). What I'd do would
be to load a bunch of stuff, new_forth, then load a bunch more. This also
protected me from crashes (much more common in FORTH). Wouldn't it be possible
to do much the same thing in OPS-5?
-- 
Name: Peter da Silva
Graphic: `-_-'
UUCP: ...!shell!{graffiti,baylor}!peter
IAEF: ...!kitty!baylor!peter