LOADB/SAVEB woes

[jkotlinski]

Back in 2009, LOADB/SAVEB got their names because "LOAD" was already in use.

Since "LOAD" is now unused, I think it would make sense to rename "LOADB"/"SAVEB" to simply "LOAD"/"SAVE" (or, possibly, "LOAD-FILE"/"SAVE-FILE").

[jkotlinski]

On more thought. Maybe "LOAD" is not that great, it is normally used for Block loading, so there is some risk of conflict or confusion.

SuperForth64 uses "LOADRAM" and "SAVENAME + SAVE".

ultraFORTH83 uses "BLOAD"/"BSAVE".

More investigation to follow...

[Whammo]

Something Unix-ish, like maybe READ WRITE. Jonesforth was no help.

[jkotlinski]

I like LOAD-FILE/SAVE-FILE best, because this naming is similar to Forth Standard words (OPEN-FILE, CLOSE-FILE, ...) but it is unclear if it is worth a breaking change...

[Whammo]

Maybe they should be hidden and we can offer LOAD and SAVE in io.fs?

[ekipan]

Something Unix-ish, like maybe READ WRITE.

If I understand correctly, unlike standard read-file and write-file, loadb and saveb do the whole file instead of following a seek pointer (Edit: so these names are probably not the best).

Does the "binary data" mentioned in the manual mean "PRG file" (another thing I don't know about)? If so how about load-prg and save-prg?

[jkotlinski]

I think "binary data" is nonsense, you are right in that it reads whole .prg files. Maybe load-prg/save-prg is good.

[jkotlinski]

Another gripe about saveb. The range is given as start address + end address. In Forth, it is nearly always start address + length.

[jkotlinski]

Yet another confusing thing... loadb takes first filename, then data address. saveb takes first data address, then filename. It is set up for mistakes.

[Whammo]

v Likes things a certain way.