Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #60061 > unrolled thread

Forth implementations for 8086

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  Forth implementations for 8086 Abraham Moller <molleraj@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 06:43 -0700
    Re: Forth implementations for 8086 minforth@arcor.de - 2017-05-30 07:49 -0700
    Re: Forth implementations for 8086 Abraham Moller <molleraj@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 07:57 -0700
      Re: Forth implementations for 8086 minforth@arcor.de - 2017-05-30 11:43 -0700
        Re: Forth implementations for 8086 Abraham Moller <molleraj@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 12:04 -0700
          Re: Forth implementations for 8086 Abraham Moller <molleraj@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 18:36 -0700
            Re: Forth implementations for 8086 Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-30 21:24 -0500
    Re: Forth implementations for 8086 albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-05-30 19:08 +0200
      Re: Forth implementations for 8086 Abraham Moller <molleraj@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 11:04 -0700

#60061 — Forth implementations for 8086

Hi everyone,

I am interested in running a Forth interpreter on my 80186-compatible QuickPad Pro. For more information about the device, look here: http://www.victor-notes.com/qppro/. The key thing that makes it different from other DOS compatibles is its 60x16 "CGA" screen. 

I have tried Pygmy Forth and F-PC, but F-PC is not compatible, and I would like a newer distribution. Does anyone have any recommendations? As far as Pygmy Forth, does anyone know how to shorten the boot screen (i.e., remove the file list), and recompile the kernel?

I also see that Gforth EC supports the 8086 and people have cross-compiled a DOS-compatible version. This would be ideal. Does the newest Gforth EC for 8086 support file I/O? Also, has anyone successfully cross-compiled it? I've tried multiple times to build gforth from multiple versions following directions in old posts on this forum. Everything I have tried has failed (either in building gforth or gforth-ec). If anyone has built gf8086.com (or kernl-8086.fi), please send it to me at molleraj@gmail.com

Thanks,
Jon Moller
molleraj@gmail.com

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#60063

Am Dienstag, 30. Mai 2017 15:43:30 UTC+2 schrieb Abraham Moller:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I am interested in running a Forth interpreter on my 80186-compatible QuickPad Pro. For more information about the device, look here: http://www.victor-notes.com/qppro/. The key thing that makes it different from other DOS compatibles is its 60x16 "CGA" screen. 
> 
> I have tried Pygmy Forth and F-PC, but F-PC is not compatible, and I would like a newer distribution. Does anyone have any recommendations? As far as Pygmy Forth, does anyone know how to shorten the boot screen (i.e., remove the file list), and recompile the kernel?
> 
> I also see that Gforth EC supports the 8086 and people have cross-compiled a DOS-compatible version. This would be ideal. Does the newest Gforth EC for 8086 support file I/O? Also, has anyone successfully cross-compiled it? I've tried multiple times to build gforth from multiple versions following directions in old posts on this forum. Everything I have tried has failed (either in building gforth or gforth-ec). If anyone has built gf8086.com (or kernl-8086.fi), please send it to me at molleraj@gmail.com
> 
> Thanks,
> Jon Moller
> molleraj@gmail.com

Well ... for 16-bit DOS and a shrinked display ... gforth might be rather heavy

Do you have FASM and/or a running C compiler installed?

And there are still older DOS Forths around. F83 comes to my mind. Or the more powerful PFE.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60065

>Well ... for 16-bit DOS and a shrinked display ... gforth might be rather heavy
>
>Do you have FASM and/or a running C compiler installed?
>
>And there are still older DOS Forths around. F83 comes to my mind. Or the more >powerful PFE. 

I got a copy of gforth for DOS from David Kuehling (14K file). I do have a running C compiler. Would it be possible to compile F83 or PFE in Turbo C? It needs to be 80186-compatible.

Thanks,
Jon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60076

Am Dienstag, 30. Mai 2017 16:57:58 UTC+2 schrieb Abraham Moller:
> >Well ... for 16-bit DOS and a shrinked display ... gforth might be rather heavy
> >
> >Do you have FASM and/or a running C compiler installed?
> >
> >And there are still older DOS Forths around. F83 comes to my mind. Or the more >powerful PFE. 
> 
> I got a copy of gforth for DOS from David Kuehling (14K file). I do have a running C compiler. Would it be possible to compile F83 or PFE in Turbo C? It needs to be 80186-compatible.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jon

I have F83 here. The executable is precompiled as .COM file and features an integrated 8086 assembler.
Depending on your DOS-box compatibility it should run, as long as your box supports BIOS and DOS interrupts.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60077

> I have F83 here. The executable is precompiled as .COM file and features an integrated 8086 assembler.
> Depending on your DOS-box compatibility it should run, as long as your box supports BIOS and DOS interrupts.

I also got it from here (https://github.com/ForthHub/F83).

I may also try DX-Forth (http://dxforth.netbay.com.au/).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60082

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 3:04:50 PM UTC-4, Abraham Moller wrote:
> > I have F83 here. The executable is precompiled as .COM file and features an integrated 8086 assembler.
> > Depending on your DOS-box compatibility it should run, as long as your box supports BIOS and DOS interrupts.
> 
> I also got it from here (https://github.com/ForthHub/F83).
> 
> I may also try DX-Forth (http://dxforth.netbay.com.au/).

I was able to meta-compile Pygmy Forth v1.5 with some modifications for the QPP (fixed CLS and boot screen to be 60x16-compliant), so I think I will stick with that. Thanks everyone for your help.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60085

On 5/30/2017 8:36 PM, Abraham Moller wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 3:04:50 PM UTC-4, Abraham Moller wrote:
>>> I have F83 here. The executable is precompiled as .COM file and features an integrated 8086 assembler.
>>> Depending on your DOS-box compatibility it should run, as long as your box supports BIOS and DOS interrupts.
>>
>> I also got it from here (https://github.com/ForthHub/F83).
>>
>> I may also try DX-Forth (http://dxforth.netbay.com.au/).
> 
> I was able to meta-compile Pygmy Forth v1.5 with some modifications for the QPP (fixed CLS and boot screen to be 60x16-compliant), so I think I will stick with that. Thanks everyone for your help.
> 

There is Pygmy 1.7 now available for free

For the longest time that was my favorite Forth.


-- 
Cecil - k5nwa

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60069

In article <0f9df421-1851-4a0a-9cbc-3aa6ecc5e169@googlegroups.com>,
Abraham Moller  <molleraj@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>
>I am interested in running a Forth interpreter on my 80186-compatible Quick=
>Pad Pro. For more information about the device, look here: http://www.victo=
>r-notes.com/qppro/. The key thing that makes it different from other DOS co=
>mpatibles is its 60x16 "CGA" screen.=20

There is a 16 bit version of ciforth (mina) that runs on MSDOS.
There are also 16 bit stand alone version that boot from floppy.
Apparently you don't have an OS, so that could be a starting point.
It is bad enough to have a 80186. What being compatible with such
a beast is beyond me. That is not the important information,
I'd like to know how it is started up.
mina is ANS94 compatible.

>
>I have tried Pygmy Forth and F-PC, but F-PC is not compatible, and I would =
>like a newer distribution. Does anyone have any recommendations? As far as =
>Pygmy Forth, does anyone know how to shorten the boot screen (i.e., remove =
>the file list), and recompile the kernel?

You should be able to adapt mina, one of the formats is nasm.

<SNIP>

>Jon Moller
>molleraj@gmail.com
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#60073

> There is a 16 bit version of ciforth (mina) that runs on MSDOS.
> There are also 16 bit stand alone version that boot from floppy.
> Apparently you don't have an OS, so that could be a starting point.
> It is bad enough to have a 80186. What being compatible with such
> a beast is beyond me. That is not the important information,
> I'd like to know how it is started up.
> mina is ANS94 compatible.

I do have an OS on the QuickPad Pro (it's not quite MS-DOS, but MS-DOS compatible). The operating system is General Software Embedded DOS-ROM. 

> You should be able to adapt mina, one of the formats is nasm.

Mina does indeed work on the QPP. I will also be trying 8086 Gforth (EC) soon.

Jon

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web