Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #60222 > unrolled thread
| Started by | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-03 09:09 +0000 |
| Last post | 2017-06-13 10:52 -0500 |
| Articles | 5 on this page of 125 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-03 09:09 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2017-06-03 04:38 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-03 13:45 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2017-06-03 08:46 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-03 18:49 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-03 18:48 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2017-06-03 13:33 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-03 22:34 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-04 03:05 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2017-06-03 05:58 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2017-06-03 06:01 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-03 13:37 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2017-06-03 07:28 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-10 17:31 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages mhx@iae.nl - 2017-06-03 08:21 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 12:01 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages mhx@iae.nl - 2017-06-03 13:09 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages mhx@iae.nl - 2017-06-03 13:20 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 18:30 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 18:43 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-10 17:52 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 19:15 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages mhx@iae.nl - 2017-06-04 00:19 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-10 17:39 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages NN <november.nihal@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 06:57 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-03 14:48 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages NN <november.nihal@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 11:12 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 06:28 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages minforth@arcor.de - 2017-06-06 06:56 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-07 19:40 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-08 05:10 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 04:28 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-08 07:20 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-09 04:08 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 02:31 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 03:54 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 05:00 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 04:03 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-09 08:37 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-06-09 09:27 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-06-03 13:49 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-04 03:11 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-06-04 17:20 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-07 03:10 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-07 19:41 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-08 11:48 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-09 17:25 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-06-10 00:31 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-10 08:18 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-06-16 00:23 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-16 07:40 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-11 02:21 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2017-06-14 23:36 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-06-03 13:53 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages mhx@iae.nl - 2017-06-03 08:04 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 11:29 -0400
Re: Astronomy and programming languages krishna.myneni@ccreweb.org - 2017-06-03 08:55 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 09:57 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-06-03 10:35 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2017-06-03 19:44 +0200
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 10:15 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 06:20 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 07:13 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages minforth@arcor.de - 2017-06-06 08:21 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 09:05 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-06-06 23:49 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 00:58 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-06-07 16:05 -0400
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-07 20:26 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 14:00 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-06-07 15:46 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-07 23:06 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 01:24 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-09 17:27 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-07 23:08 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 22:26 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 01:29 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-06-08 08:28 -0400
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 08:02 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 01:26 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-09 17:30 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-08 05:17 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 04:37 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-08 07:28 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-09 17:33 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-08 11:46 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-09 17:35 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-10 02:18 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-10 07:54 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-10 08:00 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-10 08:38 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-11 17:53 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-11 18:03 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-11 18:17 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-11 18:23 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-06-11 19:21 +0100
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-11 18:24 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-06-11 19:28 +0100
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-11 19:04 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-06-11 21:13 +0100
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-06-11 21:22 +0100
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-12 03:11 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-12 07:38 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-12 08:13 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-06-12 11:22 +0100
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-06-12 11:48 +0100
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-12 13:58 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2017-06-13 02:19 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-06-10 13:16 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-11 17:53 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-06-08 08:28 -0400
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-09 17:38 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-06-03 12:23 -0500
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-06-03 10:27 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-03 18:46 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 12:42 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-03 22:24 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 15:34 -0700
Re: Astronomy and programming languages "Rudy Velthuis" <newsgroups@rvelthuis.de> - 2017-06-03 22:55 +0000
Re: Astronomy and programming languages Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 10:27 -0700
A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-06-12 22:20 -0700
Re: A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-06-12 22:52 -0700
Re: A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-06-13 10:04 -0400
Re: A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) minforth@arcor.de - 2017-06-13 07:30 -0700
Re: A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-06-13 10:52 -0500
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
| From | Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 22:20 -0700 |
| Subject | A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) |
| Message-ID | <0d43eaa4-26b4-4e26-801f-fec56d43a717@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #60222 |
On Saturday, June 3, 2017 at 7:35:30 PM UTC+9, Anton Ertl wrote: > [...] > The interesting thing for Forthers context is that Forth used to be > very strong in astronomy. There is a section in the article titled > "Why Python?" Some of the reasons mentioned there are an antithesis > to the positions many present as Forth philosophy: It is used > because: > > * it works nicely with other languages such as C and Fortran, rather > than doing everything yourself because you can do it better. How about writing a C compiler in Forth? I recall that, about thirty years ago, many were saying it could be done. If I had the money to support myself while I did it, I would think it great fun. But I would be careful to retain Forth's split stack and other run-time architecture features. Otherwise, why bother? The whole purpose being to get Forth playing nice with other languages, .... > * it has a "battries included" philopsophy of providing all sorts of > extras rather than minimalism that worries about kilobytes on a > gigabyte machine. > > * there is a huge number of third-party libraries that can be and are > used, even though they are 'full of inefficient code to take care of > all possible cases, etc.' I was out taking a walk recently, thinking about the abomination that is the opendesktop clot of code (including systemd), and thinking over the bloat in modern code. That bloat is essentially a lot of "knowledge base articles" rewritten as software. People want computers to think for them, more than they want computers to help them think. And Forth helps us think through our problems, ... > * You can publish the Python code, and another scientist can use it to > reproduce your result (and check what you did to the data to get the > result). This requires a stronger level of portability than the > concept of "programmer portability" or the attitude "you can do it > on every system using carnal knowledge" that we can often see here. Actually, the problem with sharing code in Forth is that most people, scientists included, don't want the dual burden of understanding the stack games that the programmer worked out to avoid having to use words that access deeply in the stack. They want to read with partial understanding, just enough to convince themselves that the code they are using really solves the problem they are wanting to solve. That's a different task from understanding the code, or even the problem. > So, while the positions that are often called the Forth philosophy > have their virtues in some contexts, they are probably a major > contributor for Forth's decline in astronomy. Decline? > Some want to make us believe that the reason for the lack of > popularity of Forth is the lack of a marketing campaign by a big > corporation, but if that was the case, astronomers would be > programming in PL/I, not Python. Also, it's pretty hard to wean > programmers off their favourite language, and network effects make it > easy for a language to stay in a field where it is strong. Forth > obviously dropped the ball in astronomy. I don't think so. Forth is deeply interwoven in this planet's history of computing, and in the technology. Much of that history is trying to escape from what Forth gives the engineer, but that is also impossible. > Anyway, my conclusions: The positions that are usually presented as > Forth philosophy are not beneficial in every case, so we should not > treat them as absolutes. And some of the things that are often > maligned here, in particular, libraries, are actually helpful in many > cases. If we really want to make a "popular Forth", we would start with demoting the integer. Then we would proceed to produce an infix interpreter (and a few words to escape from it when we want) and agree on a standard version of that interpreter. (Actually, we could have several, modeled after each of several of the popular languages.) We apparently have optimization better developed than I'd thought, and I keep hearing that we have macro-pre-processor tools to help us lop bits of source that are not needed for a particular OS or environment. Using C as an example, we could construct an ANSI C interpreter, and then we could add some things like optional namespaces, with a #pragma called FORTH_DIALECT_C or something, to turn them off and on, and another to test whether the dialect is available. The question is whether anyone interested in popularizing Forth has the time (and money to support himself and his family) to do it. (I currently have the time, but not the money. In a few more days, I probably won't have the time, either.) > - anton > -- > M. Anton Ertl http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html > comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html > New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html > EuroForth 2017: http://www.euroforth.org/ef17/ One last thought to kind of throw a little water on the flame war at "THAT WON'T BE FORTH!!!!!" ... Every application written, in any language, really, defines its own language. That is true from a mathematicians point of view, and it's true enough from the non-mathematical person's viewpoint, as well. -- Joel Rees Trying to re-invent the industry all by myself: http://defining-computers.blogspot.jp/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 22:52 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) |
| Message-ID | <871sqo4eor.fsf@nightsong.com> |
| In reply to | #60680 |
Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> writes: > How about writing a C compiler in Forth? I recall that, about thirty > years ago, many were saying it could be done. There is a partial C to Forth converter on mpeforth.com somewhere, iirc. Maybe that counts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-13 10:04 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) |
| Message-ID | <20170613100422.3c624a77@_> |
| In reply to | #60680 |
On Mon, 12 Jun 2017 22:20:37 -0700 (PDT) Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> wrote: > How about writing a C compiler in Forth? ... > I recall that, about thirty years ago, many were saying it could be > done. There are some complexities to parsing C. It's not as simple and straight forward as it seems. But, if you get past that, then you need to convert C's functions, which take function parameters, to zero-operand, i.e., stack based, like Forth. C doesn't require a stack for functions, but most C's use one because it allows for recursion. I.e., C's function calls push and pop arguments to the stack. Once the behavior to push/pop parameters is implemented, then you need to convert C's control-flow to Forth. I think that would cover a very large percentage of C, if not all of it. In other words, most of Forth (high-level) is basically procedures with a bunch of C function calls declared as "void function (void)" (i.e., zero-operand) with some control-flow. Some procedures primitives which do work. You'd need to contort/rewrite C to fit this simpler model. > Using C as an example, we could construct an ANSI C interpreter, There are ANSI C interpreters out there. So far, I haven't seen any which are able to implement the entire C language. The ones I'm aware of are not coded in Forth either. However, they could be modified to emit Forth. The same is probably true of C compilers. Someone should be able to convert GCC's IR or AST to Forth. Anyway, my suggestion would be to modify an existing project which parses C correctly, e.g., GCC, and convert the intermediate code produced by such a compiler to Forth. Less work. More accurate. Rod Pemberton -- The Paris Agreement is irrelevant. A carbon tax is futile. The only solution is technology. Please tell Elon Musk that he is not being a technology visionary.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | minforth@arcor.de |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-13 07:30 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) |
| Message-ID | <50ea6710-6357-49c7-b35c-297e860cb216@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #60680 |
Am Dienstag, 13. Juni 2017 07:20:38 UTC+2 schrieb Joel Rees: > On Saturday, June 3, 2017 at 7:35:30 PM UTC+9, Anton Ertl wrote: > > [...] > > The interesting thing for Forthers context is that Forth used to be > > very strong in astronomy. There is a section in the article titled > > "Why Python?" Some of the reasons mentioned there are an antithesis > > to the positions many present as Forth philosophy: It is used > > because: > > > > * it works nicely with other languages such as C and Fortran, rather > > than doing everything yourself because you can do it better. > > How about writing a C compiler in Forth? > There is no software value per se without any application (if it's not educational or pastime). So C code upfront translated to Forth backend must show benefits which I fail to see. Both languages are too similar and low-level. Forth's major benefit is its interactivity. I could imagine a Forth system with an interactively controllable embedded C compiler like tcc. Or a C Compiler married with a preprocessing Forth macro system. But is it worth the effort? So what remains are embedded DSL Interpreters built in Forth. Embedded Compilers are very rare in practice.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-13 10:52 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: A Small Challenge (Re: Astronomy and programming languages) |
| Message-ID | <ohp1hp$sa6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #60680 |
On 6/13/2017 12:20 AM, Joel Rees wrote: > > > How about writing a C compiler in Forth? > > I recall that, about thirty years ago, many were saying it could be done. > > If I had the money to support myself while I did it, I would think it > great fun. But I would be careful to retain Forth's split stack and > other run-time architecture features. Otherwise, why bother? > > The whole purpose being to get Forth playing nice with other languages, .... > In the 80s I was working at porting a homemade C compiler to various CPUs and one of the things I did was to include a Forth engine inside the C compiler, I used it to generate the code and optimize it for the target CPU. Since the C compiler used a recursive decent LL3 grammar, it naturally generated RPN code which the Forth compiler took, optimized and generated the output code. I planned eventually to write the whole thing in Forth but never got to do it as life got in the way. > > We apparently have optimization better developed than I'd thought, and > I keep hearing that we have macro-pre-processor tools to help us lop > bits of source that are not needed for a particular OS or environment. > Optimization has gotten to be excellent but its way complicated compared to alternatives which although not as good it can be excellent and simple to understand using advance macro processors, it's not often used but I like the approach. > -- > Joel Rees > > Trying to re-invent the industry all by myself: > http://defining-computers.blogspot.jp/ > -- Cecil - k5nwa
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web