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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #38023

Re: Rockwell R65F11

From Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.lang.forth
Subject Re: Rockwell R65F11
Date 2015-04-06 13:55 -0700
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <87zj6l9duc.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <20150402102012.66a1452d@T60A> <551d2736$0$3060$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> <20150403121645.6705fc14@T60A> <87vbhd6v02.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> <20150406105114.38629028@T60A>

Show all headers | View raw

Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> writes:
>> I believe even Micropython needs around a megabyte of ram. 
> You startled me,...
> The ARM processor has 1MB of Flash,  and 196kB RAM, and the current 
> download size seems to be ~260kB. 

Hmm, yeah, it looks like I got confused, I checked again and the person
had actually told me the program space used is around 256k and the ram
usage varies.

Still, Python aims more for programming comfort (comfort is good) than
minimizing memory footprint.  Picobit and Microscheme might be of
interest (also Lua) if you want smaller languages.

> If there was an ideal engine, it could start work in small embedded 
> systems with no libraries, then, as it grew then libraries would be 
> translated or written.

Lists, dictionaries, strings, and a few other types are very fundamental
to Python so you'd need them, though I guess they are doable.

The bytecode stuff isn't inherent to Python at all, it's just a detail
of how one particular implementation works.  That happens to be the most
widely used implementation (CPython), but the most advanced
implementation (PyPy) has a JIT compiler.

You might also look at Lua (uses a register-based VM), Picobit (uses
bytecode), and Microscheme (generates AVR 8-bit native code but
currently has no garbage collector).

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

Thread

Rockwell R65F11 Derek Simmons <dereks314@gmail.com> - 2015-03-23 15:52 -0700
  Re: Rockwell R65F11 "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-23 23:46 +0000
    Re: Rockwell R65F11 Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-23 17:24 -0700
  Re: Rockwell R65F11 Derek Simmons <dereks314@gmail.com> - 2015-03-23 17:33 -0700
    Re: Rockwell R65F11 visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-03-24 21:44 -0700
      Re: Rockwell R65F11 hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-03-25 14:47 -0700
        Re: Rockwell R65F11 rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-03-25 18:42 -0400
      Re: Rockwell R65F11 Derek Simmons <dereks314@gmail.com> - 2015-03-25 19:43 -0700
      Re: Rockwell R65F11 Derek Simmons <dereks314@gmail.com> - 2015-03-25 20:08 -0700
        Re: Rockwell R65F11 visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-03-25 21:41 -0700
          Re: Rockwell R65F11 hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-03-25 22:43 -0700
            Re: Rockwell R65F11 Derek Simmons <dereks314@gmail.com> - 2015-03-26 11:42 -0700
              Re: Rockwell R65F11 "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-26 20:50 +0000
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-03-26 18:07 -0700
            Re: Rockwell R65F11 visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-03-26 13:11 -0700
              Re: Rockwell R65F11 hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-03-26 21:11 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-03-26 22:14 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-03-28 16:57 -0700
            Re: Rockwell R65F11 hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-03-28 17:18 -0700
              Re: Rockwell R65F11 Derek Simmons <dereks314@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 11:05 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-04-02 10:20 +0100
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-04-02 11:25 +0000
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-04-03 12:16 +0100
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-03 09:23 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-04-06 10:51 +0100
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-06 13:55 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-04-07 20:18 +0100
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-07 19:02 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-02 16:10 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 22:57 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-03 00:06 -0700
                Re: Rockwell R65F11 hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-03 09:00 -0700
  Re: Rockwell R65F11 Jan Coombs <Jan-54 <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com>> - 2015-04-08 08:27 +0100
    Re: Rockwell R65F11 Derek Simmons <dereks314@gmail.com> - 2015-04-24 12:22 -0700
      Re: Rockwell R65F11 hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-04-24 13:38 -0700
        Re: Rockwell R65F11 Derek Simmons <dereks314@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 08:35 -0700

csiph-web