Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Paul Rubin Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: PGP in forth ? Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 22:28:34 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 21 Message-ID: <87twbrkbul.fsf@nightsong.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2d5e386fab86bfabe66c03f07c8ca43a"; logging-data="7274"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18FV2Dm2nlb6cwUHzH0Z7hb" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZDaBCNCeRyLfB6LcvDRcO15Os7c= sha1:2xnOtuiakjVknSxyDAlzuVqnsZo= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:52369 Ron Aaron writes: > though [8th] also doesn't have any PGP implementation, it would at > least be feasible to write one in a reasonable amount of time. The first thing to do would be use GnuPG for a while and study its documentation to figure out what functions and interface a *th version would need. That would messy and time consuming all by itself, because GnuPG has so many features. :( > probably be a better use of time and resources to simply hook the GPG > easy library Jim was interested in implementing a Forth-specific CPU architecture on an FPGA a while back, so I'm guessing that's the target platform, which in turn would be why a Forth implementation is desired. But if the resulting machine has enough resources to run something like PGP, it would probably be useful to give it the ability to run C programs, even with a bad efficiency hit compared with Forth on the same CPU. At that point it should be ok to use a C implementation of PGP, maybe with the low level crypto stuff coded in machine primitives for speed.