Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Hume <David.Hume@example.com>
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: the FORTH computer language
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 23:16:26 +0100
Organization: Haphazard
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <84a8r92ptx.fsf@example.com>
References: <8586b234-ff9e-4fa6-8070-6dfe3df64124@googlegroups.com> <n07q8l$vas$1@dont-email.me> <84twpj8fi8.fsf@example.com> <n0acde$i4q$1@dont-email.me> <84d1w78a2b.fsf@example.com> <n0ah0n$1rk$1@dont-email.me> <n0e6hl$kjl$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 3NtQH5oMwdXa1l1iAsMESg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
X-No-Archive: Yes
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:1g9viAN/hGDOFShG7rt4+VRnu4o=
Xref: csiph.com alt.folklore.computers:153284

"gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> writes:

> "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:n0ah0n$1rk$1@dont-email.me...
>> ISTR a PDP-11 version where DUP resolved to MOV (SP), -(SP)
>
> Mea Culpa and a senior moment, I'd forgotten about the Return Stack and the 
> Variable Stack of FORTH
>
> Change the above to read MOV (R0), -(R0)

It doesn't really matter. I think we are talking at cross purposes. Your
discription of Forth as assembler is incorrect because Forth is cross
platform. But also your references to Forth implementations including
Forth on Windows are not what I am referring to as Forth. At some point
in the past, before the existence of Windows, Forth was a finished
product. It was implemented as a low level interpreter, and an
operating system. It just isn't an assembler. You might argue that it is
assembler for a virtual machine. But then if you define a virtual
machine which executes LISP then LISP is an assembler.