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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #54109

Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory

Show all headers | View raw

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
>> What this example shows is that CREATE should really FALIGN its body,
> 
> For small systems like Amforth, maybe it would be better to have FCREATE
> and FDOES if you want float alignment.  Otherwise you waste memory.

I don't think it'll be a huge waste, and IMO the convenience is worth
it for the standard language.  It makes more sense to have a specific
(nonstandard) unaligned CREATE for small systems.  There is an obvious
analogy with ALLOCATE, which must be maximally aligned.

Andrew.

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2017-01-17 09:00 +0000
  Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-17 01:38 -0800
    Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-17 13:54 +0000
      Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-17 13:10 -0800
        Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-01-18 03:15 -0600
        Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-18 13:43 +0000
          Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-18 13:20 -0800
            Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-01-19 02:40 +0100
            Re: Rosetta Code: Accumulator factory anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2017-01-19 16:27 +0000

csiph-web