In article <gre520$7v2$2@news-01.bur.connect.com.au>,
Ed <nospam@invalid.com> wrote:
>Anton Ertl wrote:
>> "Ed" <nospam@invalid.com> writes:
>> >Either way the impact is much the same - a portable program may
>> >not employ names greater than 31 chars. Luckily this limit is still
>> >very practical even today.
>>
>> At least for human-generated names. Gforth got longer names in order
>> to accomodate machine-generated names.
>
>As do most 32-bit forths support long names. I guess if one has the
>resources then why not. But I hope it's not humans that have to re-type
>those long names after they've been generated

The most important reason is I think to not have arbitrary limitations
that must be remembered.
Just because one can have names longer than 4 billion characters
on a 64 bit Forth that is no reason to use them.

Groetjes Albert

--
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst