Re: REPRESENT revisited


"Anton Ertl" <anton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2005Sep13.230300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "Ed" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> >"Anton Ertl" <anton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >news:2005Sep11.213049@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> "Ed" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >> >"Anton Ertl" <anton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> REPRESENT is apparently modeled on the Unix function ecvt(). Unix
> >> also has a function fcvt(), which is better for output in fixed-point
> >> format. Maybe we should have such a word in Forth, too; however, it's
> >> not REPRESENT.
> >
> >Why not write up the proposal?
>
> Yes, once I have written up all the other proposals that are more
> important IMO.

Do it now. You obviously felt strongly enough about the issue
to launch such a blatant attack on my proposal then perhaps you
should follow it through to the end?

Had this been the only or first time I would have let it pass but
unfortunately it has become a pattern.

This is not a moderated newsgroup and you are not "Forth's
policeman" whose job it is to quash any ideas other than your own.

No wonder people eventually stop responding your criticisms.

Ed



.