Aloha Ihor,
Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@posteo.net> writes:
"Thomas S. Dye" <tsd@tsdye.online> writes:
My hunch is that the ext: part of ext:gforth expects that
forth-mode is setup to use the forth-mode distributed with
GForth.
Yes. Our policy is to support the official distribution when
possible. Supporting non-standard packages is optional.
Spacemacs appears to use forth-mode from Elpa, instead, and I
find
forth-mode.el in the elpa subdirectory of my Spacemacs.
I would be surprised if such a name clash happened on ELPA.
Indeed, it
does not. There is no such package on ELPA. Nonstandard
forth-mode that
overrides the official gforth distribution is on MELPA:
https://melpa.org/#/forth-mode
Overriding the namespace is a bug. It must be fixed on
https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/forth-mode/ side.
If so, could ob-forth.el be patched to enable all Emacs
users--plain, Spacemacs, Doom, Prelude, Scimax, etc.--to
evaluate
Forth code blocks? Or, should ob-doc-forth give instructions
how
to setup forth-mode to use the one distributed with GForth?
What is the best way forward here?
forth-mode from MELPA is grabbing the official namespace.
This problem has been reported in
https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/forth-mode/issues/19 but was
not acted
upon.
Eight years ago!
It is honestly not our job to fix such things. I suggest
emphasizing
that ob-forth expects forth-mode distributed officially.
OK, will do.
ob-forth broken with Spacemacs/Doom/etc is a problem of
Spacemacs/Doom/etc. Distributing a package does not follow the
basic
lisp conventions is not nice.
Agreed. Thanks for tracking this down.
I'll get rid of my Spacemacs Forth support and set it up manually
instead.
All the best,
Tom
--
Thomas S. Dye
https://tsdye.online/tsdye
