Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #42901 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-10-28 09:04 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-12-12 18:52 -0800 |
| Articles | 14 on this page of 174 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 09:04 -0700
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 09:18 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 12:35 -0400
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 09:54 -0700
Re: Stoked lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 10:35 -0700
Re: Stoked Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 11:21 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 14:24 -0400
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 13:12 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 16:31 -0400
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 14:55 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 01:36 -0400
Re: Stoked Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 06:01 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 13:22 -0400
Re: Stoked Marcos Cruz <use_the_contact_page@programandala.net> - 2015-11-07 17:50 +0000
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 13:04 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-07 10:19 -0800
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-07 08:29 -1000
Re: Stoked hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-11-07 13:28 -0800
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-07 13:33 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 16:40 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-07 14:25 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 18:03 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-07 15:22 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 01:13 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-07 22:35 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 01:58 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-07 23:17 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 02:49 -0500
Re: Stoked Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 00:06 -0800
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 01:40 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 15:18 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 13:31 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 17:19 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-11 20:49 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 00:57 -0500
Re: Stoked hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-11-11 22:24 -0800
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-11 23:34 -0800
Re: Stoked Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 00:03 -0800
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-12 19:37 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 15:24 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-12 13:18 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 16:40 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-12 20:59 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 01:50 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-12 23:11 -0800
Re: Stoked forthisit@gmail.com - 2015-11-12 13:47 -0800
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-12 16:27 -0800
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-12 12:18 -1000
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-13 00:28 -0800
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-11 22:37 -1000
Re: Stoked hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-11-12 23:37 -0800
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-09 14:19 +0000
Re: Stoked Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-11-23 07:47 +0100
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-23 11:27 +0000
Re: Stoked Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-11-23 13:43 +0100
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-08 12:49 -1000
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 19:20 -0500
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-07 23:44 -1000
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-08 18:23 +0000
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 10:32 -0800
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-08 18:45 +0000
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 10:53 -0800
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-08 21:25 +0000
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 14:09 -0800
Re: Stoked "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-11-09 05:32 -0500
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-09 14:58 +0000
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 23:42 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 21:11 -0800
Re: Stoked Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-11-15 12:50 +0100
Re: Stoked Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 23:56 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 03:24 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 01:31 -0800
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-07 23:57 -1000
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 02:18 -0800
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-08 08:33 -1000
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 00:07 -0500
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 23:49 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 21:06 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 00:20 -0500
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-08 22:51 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 02:22 -0500
Re: Stoked Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 04:32 -0800
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-10 13:48 +0000
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 16:17 -0500
Re: Stoked "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-11-10 17:26 -0500
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-08 21:50 -1000
Re: Stoked stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-11-09 12:15 +0000
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-09 15:09 +0000
Re: Stoked Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-11-24 09:47 +0100
Re: Stoked stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-11-24 12:54 +0000
Re: Stoked Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-11-24 15:03 +0100
Emulating a 16-bit Forth Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-11-25 13:18 +0100
Re: Emulating a 16-bit Forth Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-11-25 14:08 +0100
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-09 14:30 +0000
Re: Stoked Bernd Linsel <bl1@gmx.com> - 2015-11-09 18:27 +0100
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-10 00:50 -0800
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-07 23:52 -1000
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-07 23:16 -1000
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-07 23:07 -1000
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-08 17:58 +0000
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-11-07 12:00 -1000
Re: Stoked Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2015-11-08 17:49 +0000
Re: Stoked stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-10-28 23:24 +0000
Re: Stoked Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 17:30 -0700
Re: Stoked Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@antispam.uni.wroc.pl> - 2015-10-29 02:40 +0000
Re: Stoked stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-10-29 10:11 +0000
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 21:07 -0700
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 21:16 -0700
Re: Stoked franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2015-10-29 01:35 -0700
Re: Stoked stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-10-29 10:16 +0000
Re: Stoked lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 03:35 -0700
Re: Stoked lehs <skydda.barnen@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 03:48 -0700
Re: Stoked mhx@iae.nl - 2015-10-29 11:31 -0700
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 12:01 -0700
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-29 12:26 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:29 -0400
Re: Stoked mhx@iae.nl - 2015-10-29 13:27 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 16:48 -0400
Re: Stoked josv@planet.nl - 2015-10-29 14:58 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 01:36 -0400
Re: Stoked josv@planet.nl - 2015-10-30 04:34 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 13:28 -0400
Re: Stoked josv@planet.nl - 2015-10-30 12:05 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:32 -0400
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-10-30 18:53 -1000
Re: Stoked josv@planet.nl - 2015-11-01 04:28 -0800
Re: Stoked hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-11-03 22:27 -0800
Re: Stoked mhx@iae.nl - 2015-10-29 16:47 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 01:33 -0400
Re: Stoked mhx@iae.nl - 2015-10-31 00:55 -0700
Re: Stoked stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-10-30 11:52 +0000
Re: Stoked josv@planet.nl - 2015-10-29 14:49 -0700
Re: Stoked stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-10-30 11:50 +0000
Re: Stoked Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 18:39 +0100
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 11:11 -0700
Re: Stoked Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 20:01 +0100
Re: Stoked hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-10-28 12:34 -0700
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 13:09 -0700
Re: Stoked François <francois.ganza@wanadoo.fr> - 2015-10-28 15:25 -0700
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 21:01 -0700
Re: Stoked "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-10-29 01:58 -0400
Re: Stoked Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 23:34 -0700
Re: Stoked Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2015-10-29 08:56 +0100
Re: Stoked "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-10-28 18:41 -0400
Re: Stoked josv@planet.nl - 2015-10-29 05:28 -0700
Re: Stoked "Rod Pemberton" <boo@fasdfrewar.cdm> - 2015-12-12 11:25 -0500
Re: Stoked "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2015-12-12 08:43 -1000
Re: Stoked hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-12-16 13:45 -0800
Re: Stoked hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-12-17 10:26 -0800
Re: Stoked Rob Sciuk <rob@controlq.com> - 2015-12-13 23:29 -0500
Re: Stoked Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2015-12-13 22:31 -0800
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 15:52 -0700
Re: Stoked anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-29 16:57 +0000
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-29 12:36 -0700
Re: Stoked anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-31 14:57 +0000
Re: Stoked Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-10-31 20:25 +0100
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-03 20:39 -0800
Re: Stoked Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 16:27 -0700
Re: Stoked Alfred Singlestone <vitonis@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 05:57 -0700
Re: Stoked "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-11-02 13:15 +1100
Re: Stoked François <francois.ganza@wanadoo.fr> - 2015-11-02 02:08 -0800
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 09:28 -0700
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 09:37 -0700
Re: Stoked Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 10:28 -0700
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 10:52 -0700
Re: Stoked anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-10-28 18:14 +0000
Re: Stoked François <francois.ganza@wanadoo.fr> - 2015-10-28 15:20 -0700
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 21:16 -0700
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 12:13 -0700
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:34 -0400
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 13:57 -0800
Re: Stoked rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 17:19 -0500
Re: Stoked François <francois.ganza@wanadoo.fr> - 2015-11-09 00:10 -0800
Re: Stoked Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2015-12-12 18:52 -0800
Page 9 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
| From | François <francois.ganza@wanadoo.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-02 02:08 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <212a2e92-8fa3-4a37-9eef-f40637a6d9cf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #43078 |
Agree with HAA.
I done this test with my Forth on a P4 :
;
My Forth (16bits stack)
: TEST
10000 BEGIN
10000 BEGIN 1 - DUP 0= UNTIL DROP
1 - DUP 0=
UNTIL
DROP ;
result : 1.38sec
but I was never worried by its slowness
I use Forth for real-time (drive cutting table, positioning with incremental encode...etc...)
However, I use a lot inline assembler for critical words
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-28 09:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87pozzufdt.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> |
| In reply to | #42901 |
Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> writes: > I now have my own working Forth that I wrote in x86 assembler. Cool, you gonna post it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-28 09:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5a646885-2cad-4c19-bf26-25cba37741ac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #42903 |
On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 12:28:16 PM UTC-4, Paul Rubin wrote: > Chris Curl <...@gmail.com> writes: > > I now have my own working Forth that I wrote in x86 assembler. > > Cool, you gonna post it? Yes ... I will put it up on GitHub. I'm sure there are lots of areas for performance improvements, but even this first pass is an order of magnitude faster than my similar C++ based implementation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-28 10:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87io5qvr5x.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> |
| In reply to | #42905 |
Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> writes: > I'm sure there are lots of areas for performance improvements, but > even this first pass is an order of magnitude faster than my similar > C++ based implementation. I figured your C++ VM was a reasonable way to start. Then just change your Forth compiler backend to produce machine code instead of bytecode. Maybe that's what you did.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-28 10:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7bf812e4-81c3-41ca-aa99-a99d5ca93964@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #42901 |
It is byte code, with about 50 pseudo opcodes. I would like to have it generate executable machine code, but I haven't figured out how to make that happen yet. My approach was to tell the linker to allocate 8 1/2 MB for the stack, and then I steal the bottom 8 MB for my data. That way, I didn't need to do any memory allocation, and my EXE is still tiny. Can I put executable machine code in that area? I was under the impression that you can only put executable code into the .CODE segment, and the stack is in the .STACK segment, so it would crash and burn. Or is all that moot now, because my .MODEL is flat? I haven't tried putting x86 machine code in there and executing it directly yet ... guess what I'll be playing around with tonight?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-28 18:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2015Oct28.191421@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #42914 |
Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> writes:
>My approach was to tell the linker to allocate 8 1/2 MB for the stack, and then I steal the bottom 8 MB for my data. That way, I didn't need to do any memory allocation, and my EXE is still tiny.
>
>Can I put executable machine code in that area?
Please limit your lines to about 72 characters.
In the good old days you could put code in writable memory. These
days, various systems software usually sets up memory such that
writable memory is not executable by default. There are ways to set
it up differently (e.g., we use mmap() with apropriate flags in
Gforth), but I don't know whether you can achieve that with assembler
directives (I would not expect it).
- 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 2015: http://www.rigwit.co.uk/EuroForth2015/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | François <francois.ganza@wanadoo.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-28 15:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <48b9b647-4d2a-47f4-aa5c-757ee555f743@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #42901 |
Le mercredi 28 octobre 2015 17:04:34 UTC+1, Chris Curl a écrit : > I now have my own working Forth that I wrote in x86 assembler. The EXE is 17k and I built it with 8MB of memory for the code and dictionary. If I assume that a typical word uses 64 bytes, then that gives me room for 130,000 words, give or take. And it very easy to increase that space if need be. > Hi! Very interesting ! Your Forth works on Windows ? (EXE) Do you respect the actual standard ? What do you expect of your Forth ? > Sorry to be a bother, but I'm excited about this and want to share it with someone, and I feel like you folks would understand best. don't ;-) François
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-28 21:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0a98a669-ea7a-4f86-ad6f-2193cba635c2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #42931 |
On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 6:20:16 PM UTC-4, François wrote: > Le mercredi 28 octobre 2015 17:04:34 UTC+1, Chris Curl a écrit : > > I now have my own working Forth that I wrote in x86 assembler. The EXE is 17k and I built it with 8MB of memory for the code and dictionary. If I assume that a typical word uses 64 bytes, then that gives me room for 130,000 words, give or take. And it very easy to increase that space if need be. > > > > Hi! > Very interesting ! > Your Forth works on Windows ? (EXE) > Do you respect the actual standard ? > What do you expect of your Forth ? > > > Sorry to be a bother, but I'm excited about this and want to share it with someone, and I feel like you folks would understand best. > > don't ;-) > > François Yes, Windows. I have run it on Win7, Win8.1 and Win10. It is a very bare bones implementation right now, with just a subset of the core words. But it has the standard capability to be able to define new words (regular and immediate) that can be built up to whatever flavor of Forth I desire. At this time, I'm not too terribly concerned about rigorously following the standard. For me, this is mostly to satisfy my intellectual curiosity and to play with some thoughts I have about machine learning and AI.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 12:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <73f0bb15-a7e2-4630-962d-77c68e54e91d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #42901 |
So ... today I learned how to put executable code into allocated memory ... now to start generating x86 machine instructions instead of byte-code. That had better make it faster!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-30 15:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n10gj8$e9c$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #43004 |
On 10/30/2015 3:13 PM, Chris Curl wrote: > So ... today I learned how to put executable code into allocated memory ... now to start generating x86 machine instructions instead of byte-code. > > That had better make it faster! Yes, that is a given I think. Just look at the existing systems. The fastest systems are optimizing code generators rather than the many other forms of Forth executables. -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 13:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8c00f487-bfd7-4b63-adfc-8859350145a8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #42901 |
I chose to write my own Forth because I am one of those kinds of people who likes to roll his own. This is a hobby for me, and I have the time to, and it satisfies my intellectual curiosity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 17:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n1lta3$9a4$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #43327 |
On 11/7/2015 4:57 PM, Chris Curl wrote: > I chose to write my own Forth because I am one of those kinds of people > who likes to roll his own. This is a hobby for me, and I have the time > to, and it satisfies my intellectual curiosity. Nothing wrong with that. I prefer to stand on the shoulders of giants and see what they see than to try to climb my way up to their boot tops getting covered in the mud. lol -- Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | François <francois.ganza@wanadoo.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-09 00:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b3ae2f1b-37aa-4081-9ace-7e16b12b1dd4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #42901 |
Le mercredi 28 octobre 2015 17:04:34 UTC+1, Chris Curl a écrit : > I now have my own working Forth that I wrote in x86 assembler. The EXE is 17k and I built it with 8MB of memory for the code and dictionary. If I assume that a typical word uses 64 bytes, then that gives me room for 130,000 words, give or take. And it very easy to increase that space if need be. > > Sorry to be a bother, but I'm excited about this and want to share it with someone, and I feel like you folks would understand best. For portability is optimal, the only solution is to do as JAVA and use a virtual machine. Otherwise, to know if a code will compile correctly you can control the value of CELL. CELL = 2 -> 16-bit CELL = 4 -> 32-bit Anyway, want to use 32-bit code on a 16-bit is complicated ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-12 18:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6ea933d9-e547-46c7-ba88-661cf83716d5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #42901 |
Thanks, Rod. I know it could be faster, but your test tells me that at least, I am in the ballpark. I have stopped worrying too much about how fast it is and am now focused on adding the functionality I want.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web