Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style

Path	csiph.com!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style
Date	Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:26:16 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	78
Message-ID	<nm0rss$95j$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<3a7d6348-9545-4fdc-b990-cefcb0b7f0e6@googlegroups.com> <973598e9-c320-4f42-9ad0-5bdf5bfe11a4@googlegroups.com> <8fc90f76-ca06-498d-b12a-603ea8647079@googlegroups.com> <2159c4c3-114b-42a0-b04c-3efb928679fc@googlegroups.com> <nlv1o0$8au$1@dont-email.me> <ea119550-f0a9-4e35-9e2b-4e2a36968101@googlegroups.com> <nm07sh$n94$2@dont-email.me> <9a73adb8-c83b-4ef1-b504-9507239577f3@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
Injection-Date	Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:26:20 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info	mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="37ae68441c80f157b8b51f72be5b18c2"; logging-data="9395"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18x1kQdwM9TShJ1XdBcallF"
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
In-Reply-To	<9a73adb8-c83b-4ef1-b504-9507239577f3@googlegroups.com>
Cancel-Lock	sha1:KzYtmVaLeoHbgBayirSjXlAysXA=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.forth:49059

Show key headers only | View raw

On 7/11/2016 1:51 PM, Mark Wills wrote:
> On Monday, 11 July 2016 14:44:51 UTC+1, rickman  wrote:
>> On 7/11/2016 4:59 AM, Mark Wills wrote:
>>> On Monday, 11 July 2016 03:53:53 UTC+1, rickman  wrote:
>>>> On 7/10/2016 6:00 PM, Mark Wills wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, 10 July 2016 16:50:08 UTC+1, foxaudio...@gmail.com  wrote:
>>>>>> Sure have Mark. It's very nice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am porting my cross compiler and my variation of camel Forth to Ti99. I always wanted TiForth to hold Tos is a register.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The cycle count looks like it will be faster.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Boy I like that TmS9900 instruction set better than x86.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just needs a stack pointer or 2 in Hardware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> B
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, the TMS9900 instruction set is by the nicest I've used on any processor
>>>>> over the years. The 68K comes a close second for me :-)
>>>>
>>>> Funny, I still have a couple of TMS99x computers around here somewhere.
>>>> One is a Technico 9900 single board computer that uses EPROMs.  Another
>>>> is one I designed using a 9995 built with wire wrap.  I wanted to use
>>>> the 9995 to control an IBM Selectric I got at a something-fest, but it
>>>> was too worn out to print reliably.  Seems those mechanicals don't last
>>>> forever.  Both CPU boards are sitting in my basement next to an old 8008
>>>> multiple board computer.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Rick C
>>>
>>> The 9995s and (in-particular) the 9900s are getting quite valuable now. The
>>> 9995 is a much simpler chip to work with. IIRC it needs no supporting chippery,
>>> whereas the 9900 at least requires a 4-phase clock. Their register to memory
>>> architecture is beautiful. If only they had a hardware stack! (Later variants
>>> of the 99xx family did indeed have hardware stacks and a whole raft of
>>> additional instructions).
>>
>> Why would you want a hardware stack?  That would be limited in size and
>> likely function.  The 8008 predecessor to the 8080 has a small hardware
>> stack.
>>
>> Or do you mean a dedicated stack pointer in the chip?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick C
>
> Yes, just a stack pointer, and MOV instructions to get push/pop.
>
> It's fairly simple to anyway. Suppose R0 is your stack pointer register:
>
> LI R0,$E000 - stack is at $E000
>
> to push data:
> DECT R0 - decrement stack pointer by two (16 bit word i.e. two bytes)
> MOV Rx,*R0 - move some register (Rx) to the memory addressed by R0
>
> to pop:
> MOV *R0+,Rx  - move data at address addressed by R0 to Rx, and increase R0 by two

But in the TMS9900 R0 is in memory.  You are talking about a hardware 
stack pointer which would require new instructions like:

PUSH R0 - to push the contents of R0 on the stack

Or if you want to share the common syntax,

DECT SP
MOV Rx,*SP
MOV *SP+,Rx

-- 

Rick C

Thread

Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-07-08 17:44 -0700
  Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-09 04:27 +0000
  Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 10:30 -0700
    Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 21:56 -0700
      Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style mhx@iae.nl - 2016-07-10 00:30 -0700
        Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style mhx@iae.nl - 2016-07-10 00:34 -0700
          Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-07-10 09:10 -0700
      Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style endlessboomcapitalism@gmail.com - 2016-07-12 18:55 -0700
  Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 01:39 -0700
    Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-07-10 08:50 -0700
      Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 15:00 -0700
        Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 22:53 -0400
          Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 01:59 -0700
            Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 09:44 -0400
              Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 10:51 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 15:26 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 15:18 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 19:56 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 23:13 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2016-07-26 07:34 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 11:23 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2016-07-26 13:18 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 18:14 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 02:43 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 10:24 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 02:46 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 10:26 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 02:53 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 08:32 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 09:04 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 02:05 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-07-28 06:27 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 03:01 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 02:28 -0400
            Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 13:05 -0400
              Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 10:47 -0700
        Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-07-11 08:50 -0500
          Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 08:23 -0700
            Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-07-11 11:48 -0500
              Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-07-11 12:16 -0500
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 10:38 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-07-11 13:32 -0500
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-07-11 12:45 -0500
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 11:49 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-07-12 05:02 -0500
              Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Michael Barry <barrym95838@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 14:22 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-07-11 16:31 -0500
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 15:31 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-07-12 15:55 -0700
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 22:48 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-08-10 01:54 -0700
            Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-07-11 11:58 -0700
          Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-07-12 15:59 -0700
            Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2016-07-26 00:40 +0000
              Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-07-25 21:16 -1000
              Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-07-26 03:34 -0500
              Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-07-26 16:51 +0000
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 13:51 -0400
            Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 22:50 -0400
            Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 16:32 -0700
              Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 10:19 -0400
                Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-07-27 09:05 -1000
        Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-07-12 15:51 -0700
          Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-14 03:34 -0700
            Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 22:51 -0400
      Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 01:56 -0700
        Re: Forth coding style vs "Algol et al" coding style foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-07-11 08:03 -0700

csiph-web