Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #24040
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? |
| Date | 2013-07-01 02:02 +0200 |
| Organization | 1&1 Internet AG |
| Message-ID | <kqqguv$9sj$1@online.de> (permalink) |
| References | (11 earlier) <21d980bc-12c9-477a-8df6-bd345c884e4a@googlegroups.com> <kqhiea$b6i$1@online.de> <53f1cf80-acb4-46d2-823f-2512d9d6c05f@googlegroups.com> <kqq0i4$r29$1@online.de> <0a55ff9e-15cf-4b61-952f-d43c6133a3dc@googlegroups.com> |
hughaguilar96@yahoo.com wrote: >> Since you can just write expressions in a C-like syntax, declare named >> registers, and such. I.e. since the very beginning. Due to the inherent >> parallel nature of Verilog, writing sequential processes is easier in >> assembler, but when you write a primitive for a processor, you actually >> don't want sequential stuff. > > The assembler executed up to 5 instructions in parallel, all packed into a > single opcode. And? In Verilog, you can have as much parallel things as you like. >> > It is true that the MiniForth assembly-language was >> > pretty low-level, but I learned it, so it is not impossible to learn. >> > You have to change the design of the processor hardware to get a new >> > primitive. And, as I've said before, you are limited to 32 primitives >> > --- so to add a new one, you have to remove an existing one. >> >> Or change the number of primitives to 64, which is a piece of cake. > > 64 is still an order of magnitude too few. Make it a couple of thousand > --- still a piece of cake? Yes, decoder-wise it is no problem to have as many bits for each instruction as you like. But even the x86, which has a hell lot of operations with all the extensions like SSE, MMX, FP, AES-NI and whatsoever has still a lot less than thousands. Thousands is just pure nonsense, because the MinForth architecture was slow at Forth, and therefore needed fast assembler code to get the required speed. > The point that I'm making, is that adding new primitives doesn't involve > using more gates internally, and requiring a larger chip --- if you have a > well-designed assembly-language, you can write hundreds of primitives > without requiring a bigger chip --- your "compromise" was self imposed. And if you have a Forth processor, all these "primitives" are actually high- level code... but utilize the gates of the chip just as good as an assembler. > Local variables were added to the MiniForth quite late in the project. I > was asked to provide local variables, but I said that the MiniForth as it > currently was designed, would not support locals. John Hart responded by > upgrading the MiniForth to provide a frame of 16 16-bit words at a fixed > location in data memory, along with new instructions in the assembly > language that accessed them. This was a lot like how local variables are > implemented on the 8051 for the C language. So I wrote the local variable > code to use that frame and to support up to 16 local variables per > function. I also wrote a lot of code that did stuff with the locals, such > as +! and so forth --- this was when I also introduced the "ghost > primitives" that I mentioned earlier, as most of this code never got used > (because none of the colon words in the application program had that many > local variables). Ah, I see. A fixed frame in data memory is not really what I consider "locals", as it is not reentrant... Since you didn't work on the processor, and you didn't also work on the assembler code, you simply don't understand how to factor such things into parts which don't let your primitive number explode. If I would add locals to the b16, I would use the address register model (first b16 variant, similar to GA144), and have a frame pointer which can compute a sum of fp+offset and store it in the address register, where it can be used for load and store. There is no point to have +! as instruction, because it takes at least four cycles (except if you have a special sum-addressed memory): add pointer+offset, fetch, operation, store. All the combinations of offsets, operations, and so on result in thousands of possible things you can do, without having actually thousands of primitives - this thing needs just *one* more instruction. I think the MiniForth processor also added only one or two instuctions to make locals happen. > The nice thing about working on the MiniForth, was that the hardware > adapted to me --- I didn't have to adapt to the hardware --- most > processors are a Procrustean Bed, and the programmer has to contort his > code to make it fit. With your B16 however, you have only 32 primitives, > and you lack flexibility in adapting the processor to the programmers' > needs --- your B16 is still a Procrustean Bed for the programmer. Oh, just repeating insults? If I wasn't happy with the b16, I would have changed it. Er, I actually did that... but not the way you think about it. > The MiniForth didn't have any support for OOP --- if I had asked for it, > it may have been possible, but I didn't ask --- then as now I considered > OOP to be useless in the micro-controller world. For the sort of things I want to do with the b16, totally agreed. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-16 23:17 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-17 14:19 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-17 16:04 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-17 16:15 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-18 00:01 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-19 15:33 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-19 17:25 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-19 17:00 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-20 18:35 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-19 17:38 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-20 12:51 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-20 15:28 +0000
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-20 18:39 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-21 14:50 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-22 18:56 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-23 02:35 +0000
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-22 20:48 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-23 14:49 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-26 18:08 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-27 16:32 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-30 10:10 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-30 15:18 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-30 16:01 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-30 20:22 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-30 21:22 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-30 15:52 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-01 02:02 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-30 19:25 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-01 02:34 -0500
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-07-01 16:26 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-01 23:08 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-07-01 18:10 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-01 12:35 -1000
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-07-01 18:42 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-01 13:03 -1000
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-07-02 07:20 +0000
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-02 07:38 -1000
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-07-02 07:24 +0000
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-02 13:02 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-02 05:58 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-02 03:34 -0500
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-07-01 20:01 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-02 04:43 +0000
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-02 03:41 -0500
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-02 06:09 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-07-02 13:51 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2013-07-02 14:37 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2013-07-02 14:56 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-03 00:30 +0200
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-03 02:19 -0500
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-03 05:18 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-07-03 18:10 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-03 05:30 -0400
Static superinstructions(was: OT (slightly) What is the "best" ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-07-03 14:33 +0000
Re: Static superinstructions(was: OT (slightly) What is the "best" ...) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-04 00:41 +0200
Re: Static superinstructions(was: OT (slightly) What is the "best" ...) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-07 11:32 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-07-03 18:31 -0700
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-07 11:28 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-07-02 16:44 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-02 05:56 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-02 05:58 -0500
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-03 05:57 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-03 06:43 -0500
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-30 20:29 -0400
Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-27 10:58 -0400
csiph-web