Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.stack.nl!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Rod Pemberton" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: gforth too bloated ? Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 19:19:50 -0400 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: <4b4ea6f6-3b09-434a-a501-ff31190b9f4a@googlegroups.com> <2014May20.143604@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <2014May20.174816@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <2014May21.162847@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <2014May22.160627@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <2014May23.150544@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: CNsg4fVcCsvs3UaOgZtQCw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:30624 On Fri, 23 May 2014 09:05:44 -0400, Anton Ertl wrote: > "Rod Pemberton" writes: >> On Thu, 22 May 2014 10:06:27 -0400, Anton Ertl >> wrote: >> Nobody is coding Forth using superinstructions. So, since >> you already know in advance what the vast majority of them >> are, you might as well implement most of them as primitives. > > I cannot follow you here. Why should we provide them as > primitives if nobody is using them? There is no reason to not implement them as primitives. You know what they are, at least, the most common ones. >> Also, wouldn't implementing the superinstructions as primitives >> eliminate a large quantity of work for the optimizer? > > No. Why do you think so? > As primitives, they should already be partially compiled, e.g., implemented in assembly. Rod Pemberton