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