Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #1000

Re: Renaissance of Forth

Show all headers | View raw

On Apr 3, 8:34 pm, BruceMcF <agil...@netscape.net> wrote:
> That's what I was referring to as CCODE: ... ;CCODE ~ a way to
> embed operations written in C (perhaps calling external
> functions originally designed to be called from C, perhaps
> entirely embedded), in a way that creates a Forth word that
> handles the interface, in precisely the same way that an
> external C-library function interface creates a Forth word
> that calls the external function.

Maybe the problem here is that I'm looking at this too generally.  The
OP wants to replace assembly with C.  That to me means that *anything*
assembly can do, C should be able to do the same.  If it can't, then
it's not a replacement.  Further, the OP suggested the value of this
would be that C programmers could get some of the benefits of Forth
and vice-versa.  That to me says that there should be no limits in
Forth code calling C (easy) or C code calling Forth (harder).

For trivial cases, this isn't a problem:

    CCODE:
        int square(int x) { return x*x; }
    ;CCODE

    3 square . 9 ok

Or even the reverse:

    : square dup * ;

    CCODE:
        printf("%d", square(3));
    ;CCODE

    9 ok

I can easily imagine the system mapping the top of the stack to the
variable x, and replacing it after the function ends with the return
value.  I don't have a problem with obvious mappings like this,
because, well, they're obvious.  The cross-language semantics here
aren't a problem because there isn't any pushing of the boundaries of
either language; you're dealing with the lowest common denominator of
the two languages.

That's valid, but it wasn't what the OP described.  And maybe that's
my problem.  If the problem is redefined not as being able to replace
assembly code with C, but being able to have some non-seamless,
reasonable (but incomplete) interoperability between the languages,
then things are easier.  Then instead of thinking about how to return
multiple arguments to the stack from C, we punt and say, "you can't."
Instead of worrying about mapping c-addr/u strings our counted strings
to C, we do something like require the C programmer to use a type
(other than a raw char*) that is specific to the kind of string being
passed.  If C wants to return a structure, we either say, "you can't"
or come up with some idiom to allow it.

And so on.  Again, not what the OP wanted, but what the OP wants is
too complicated.

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Renaissance of Forth visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2011-03-31 16:06 -0700
  Re: Renaissance of Forth Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-04-01 02:29 -0500
  Re: Renaissance of Forth Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-04-01 12:46 +0000
    Re: Renaissance of Forth Dennis <daruffer@gmail.com> - 2011-04-01 07:36 -0700
      Re: Renaissance of Forth Brad <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2011-04-01 07:47 -0700
      Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-01 16:40 -0700
        Re: Renaissance of Forth BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-01 18:20 -0700
    Re: Renaissance of Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-01 12:34 -0700
      Re: Renaissance of Forth Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-04-02 00:23 +0000
        Re: Renaissance of Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-01 16:24 -0700
  Re: Renaissance of Forth Gary Bergstrom <g.bergstrom@ieee.org> - 2011-04-01 08:36 -0700
  Re: Renaissance of Forth "The Beez'" <hansoft@bigfoot.com> - 2011-04-01 16:04 -0700
    Re: Renaissance of Forth mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2011-04-02 10:40 +0200
      Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-02 14:50 -0700
        Re: Renaissance of Forth "Massimo A. Dentico" <massimo_dentico@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 00:34 +0200
          Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-02 21:08 -0700
            Re: Renaissance of Forth mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2011-04-03 09:24 +0200
              Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-03 15:45 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-03 16:45 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-03 14:01 -1000
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-04-06 22:43 +0000
                Re: Renaissance of Forth BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-03 17:34 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-04 10:55 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth pliz <s.m.plis@gmail.com> - 2011-04-04 13:11 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-05 09:10 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-04 16:33 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-04 16:31 -1000
                Re: Renaissance of Forth BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-04 19:52 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-05 09:58 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-05 18:36 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-06 13:53 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-06 15:29 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-07 08:35 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-07 16:20 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2011-04-05 08:56 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-05 09:35 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-06 17:48 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-12 15:47 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 09:27 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-13 09:55 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Richard Owlett <rowlett@pcnetinc.com> - 2011-04-13 13:02 -0500
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2011-04-13 09:01 -1000
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Micke <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 13:23 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-13 20:32 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Micke <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 20:52 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-13 22:26 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Micke <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 23:42 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-14 10:42 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Micke <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 13:06 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-14 14:26 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Micke <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 21:31 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-14 23:42 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Micke <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 00:56 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 08:03 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Micke <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 09:28 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 10:28 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 20:40 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-13 22:57 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-04 08:39 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-04-04 09:41 -0700
                Re: Renaissance of Forth Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2011-04-06 22:39 +0000
  Re: Renaissance of Forth Bluebee <visualforth@rocketmail.com> - 2011-04-02 20:32 -0700
    Re: Renaissance of Forth John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2011-04-02 22:06 -0700
      Re: Renaissance of Forth BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-03 07:17 -0700
  Re: Renaissance of Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-04-04 17:09 +0000
    Re: Renaissance of Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2011-04-05 15:55 +0200
      Re: Renaissance of Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-04-07 16:25 +0000
        Re: Renaissance of Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2011-04-08 21:07 +0200
          Re: Renaissance of Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-04-09 17:29 +0000
            Re: Renaissance of Forth Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2011-04-10 18:39 +0200
      redirecting TYPE to a string (was: Renaissance of Forth) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2011-04-09 16:54 +0000
        Re: redirecting TYPE to a string (was: Renaissance of Forth) BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2011-04-09 13:07 -0700
        Re: redirecting TYPE to a string (was: Renaissance of Forth) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2011-04-10 18:07 +0200

csiph-web