Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #55506
| From | Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? |
| Date | 2017-03-07 10:50 -0600 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <o9mo8a$i5f$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (9 earlier) <3688925b-65a3-4e80-8fad-d9191bfaa93c@googlegroups.com> <o9j9us$t1c$1@dont-email.me> <6c670837-c467-4144-a4a2-4c5d65589e5e@googlegroups.com> <o9k4m9$uf5$1@dont-email.me> <0e6901e4-6a3a-46f2-a188-1e63d3306376@googlegroups.com> |
On 3/7/2017 9:44 AM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 10:04:50 AM UTC-7, Cecil - k5nwa wrote: >> On 3/6/2017 7:22 AM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 2:28:37 AM UTC-7, Alex wrote: >>>> On 3/6/2017 02:45, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> In Straight Forth, all work with strings is done on the string-stack >>>>> --- you never work with address and count on the data-stack like in >>>>> ANS-Forth --- a packed string (address and count packed into a cell) >>>>> can be held on the data-stack temporarily, and this is only done for >>>>> the purpose of storing it in a data-structure (where it takes up only >>>>> one cell, saving memory >>>> >>>> Why? On a modern system 64bit system, saving memory (which is scalable) >>>> & sacrificing CPU (where we're nearly at limit, hence not scalable) is >>>> the absolute reverse of what you should be pursuing. >>> >>> Data structures can be huge, so storing a string in one cell rather than two could save a lot of memory --- data-cache thrashing is a major speed sink, so saving memory is the same as improving speed. >>> >>> Straight Forth is a standard, so it describes behavior rather than implementation. >>> >>> As a practical matter though, it is worthwhile to design it in such a manner that implementation will be efficient on modern desktop-computers. My own implementation is ITC, and I expect that most implementations will be ITC for a while, although STC is possible. >>> >>> In an ITC system, it is worthwhile to make the string-stack be part of the standard. This allows all of the string-stack words to be primitives written in assembly-language. By comparison, ANS-Forth doesn't have a string-stack as part of the standard. I wrote STRING-STACK.4TH which is ANS-Forth --- in order for it to be ANS-Forth however, then it has to be written in Forth, and hence it has to depend upon the compiler's optimizer in order to be efficient (it is pretty efficient in VFX and is much less efficient in SwiftForth). >>> >>> Such a low-level and fundamental aspect of Forth as the string-stack should be part of the standard so it can be written in assembly-language for efficiency. Also, a lot of the Forth language (such as <# etc.) rely on having a string-stack, so if these words are going to be standard then the string-stack has to be standard also. >>> >> >> I have quite a few systems in my house, the smaller CPUs are Quad Core >> with 16 GB of RAM. The exception is this PC, it has 16GB of RAM but it >> can't be used because it is running Windows 7 32 bit OS for >> compatibility with very old software, everyone else is running 64 bit >> Windows 10. >> >> You mentioned before you want Straight Forth for CNC applications, what >> company would buy a PC for that purpose and saddle it with small amounts >> of RAM? But I will say this, I have worked on the CNC industry designing >> hardware and writing software and it does not take a whole lot resources >> except good software to run a CNC or have a PC to program a CNC >> controller, specially programming is a very simple straight forward >> application. Forth would do exceedingly well at such a task. >> >> I would not design a system based on the premise that the user is going >> to be cheap and not have an adequate amount of RAM. > > Adequate for what? > > My point was that I couldn't think of any application that needed more than 4GB of RAM --- first-person shoot-em-up games and browsers are the only programs that I can think of that need more than 4GB of RAM, but I'm not interested in writing either with Straight Forth --- maybe "big data" programs too, which is something I'm interested in, so that would be a reason to support the full 64-bit address. > Adequate to run the OS, tools, and applications, with 64 bit OS I would think of 8GB as a minimum. The OS runs better when it has a lot of RAM available to it. Still for most applications 8GB is plenty, I run Virtualization a lot so in that case one can't get enough RAM, my five main PCs have 24GB of RAM, everyone else has 16GB both those limits are due to the motherboard otherwise they would have more RAM, virtualization eats a lot of RAM, 24 GB seems to be plenty. Granted that while using Forth 4 GB is lots of room for programs, Windows will eat at least 1.5GB leaving 2.5GB which is still a lot unless there is tons of data. Linux uses less resources so more RAM is available for programs. -- Cecil - k5nwa
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 01:51 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 02:35 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 02:46 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-27 17:38 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 14:12 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 04:42 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 08:58 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 14:15 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 11:51 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 15:17 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-28 09:02 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 19:15 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-03-01 02:23 +0100
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 20:57 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-03-01 13:24 +0100
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 14:23 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-01 08:50 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-03-01 10:04 -0600
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 14:51 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 13:00 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-02 15:34 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-01 18:09 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 14:55 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 21:28 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 22:23 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 00:21 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-02 01:01 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 01:30 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-02 01:46 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 02:41 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-02 11:01 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-01 13:48 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2017-03-04 04:02 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-04 12:29 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-28 03:24 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 04:14 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 21:50 +0100
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 13:48 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 17:41 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 15:07 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 19:03 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 23:10 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 03:29 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 01:28 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-28 09:58 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 02:37 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-28 12:46 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 05:01 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-02-28 12:46 +0100
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 03:52 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 04:10 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 05:48 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-28 10:07 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 02:42 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 02:44 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Coos Haak <htrofhc@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 12:13 +0100
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 05:10 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? john <anon@example.com> - 2017-02-28 12:12 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 13:51 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-02-27 15:38 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 10:13 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 11:15 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-03 12:04 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 17:30 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-03 23:13 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-03-03 18:02 -0600
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-04 01:12 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 19:12 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 19:23 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-05 18:45 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-05 18:54 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 20:47 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-06 09:20 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-06 05:04 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-06 14:07 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-06 06:36 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-06 15:04 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-07 07:38 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-07 07:56 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 08:07 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 08:37 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-08 15:41 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-09 01:13 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-09 13:03 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? julian.fondren@endurance.com - 2017-03-07 08:36 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-03-07 19:02 +0100
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? alex@rivadpm.com - 2017-03-08 06:08 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-09 00:46 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-09 12:39 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-09 12:42 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-09 23:13 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-08 14:34 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-08 15:33 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-08 15:45 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-08 22:48 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-06 09:28 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-06 05:22 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-06 14:25 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-06 06:46 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-06 15:43 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-03-06 09:55 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-03-06 11:04 -0600
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-07 07:44 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-03-07 10:50 -0600
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? john <anon@example.com> - 2017-03-08 11:30 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-03-08 13:37 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-03-08 14:14 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-03-08 15:16 +0100
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? john <anon@example.com> - 2017-03-08 16:14 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? john <anon@example.com> - 2017-03-08 14:49 +0000
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 10:57 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-03-05 18:22 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 10:48 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 21:00 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 02:24 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 16:44 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 20:02 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 23:34 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 02:38 -0800
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 16:55 -0500
Re: Is GForth KEY really ANS Forth standard? albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-02-27 21:24 +0100
csiph-web