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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #51853

Re: A New Forth

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/13/2016 5:53 PM, hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 2:44:48 PM UTC-7,
> hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
>> My design is for 16-bit micro-controllers however --- if you are
>> programming a desktop-computer however, then it would not be
>> appropriate --- note however, that the only way to make money with
>> Forth that I'm aware of is with 16-bit micro-controllers
>> (desktop-computer software is always given away for free).
>
> My design is very similar to the 16-bit x86. This does not mean that
> I think the 80186 should be used (it was a bad idea 20 years ago and
> is totally obsolete now) --- all of those x86 processors have too
> much interrupt latency to be useful as micro-controllers. My design
> should be easy to implement in an FPGA, or emulate on any 16-bit
> processor.
>
> I actually have two versions. The big version supports
> double-precision numbers and ratios --- this is for cases in which
> 16-bit integers lack adequate precision. The big version requires a
> few more registers (for the double-stack pointer and the top value of
> the double-stack) --- a processor such as the PIC24 or MSP-430 has
> enough registers to support this --- the PIC24 has good support for
> multiplication and division, so it should be fast enough to make this
> extra precision realistic (you get the low cost of a 16-bit processor
> with the high precision of a 32-bit processor).

In terms of design starts, the 16 bit MCUs are losing ground.  The 8 bit 
parts are really inexpensive these days and rather capable with a very 
wide assortment of peripherals (many times a design is about the 
peripherals rather than the CPU).  The 32 bit devices have come way down 
in price over the years and have been highly optimized for power leaving 
very little room between them and the 8 bit world.

I suppose your assembly language can be implemented on any processor, 
but you seem to feel it should match the actual hardware as much as 
possible.  If so, you should pick a hardware platform that is used as 
widely as possible.

Funny you mention the x86.  This is not a family that is very widely 
used for embedded or anything else other than laptops and desktops.  I 
don't get where this is going.

If you want to make money, I suggest you go for the 32 bit MCU market. 
Specializing in 16 bit MCUs will severely limit your work opportunities.

-- 

Rick C

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

Thread

A New Forth tabcomputing@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 17:56 -0700
  Re: A New Forth Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2016-10-07 23:05 -0400
    Re: A New Forth Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-10-08 10:07 -0400
  Re: A New Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-08 13:08 +0000
    Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 10:54 -0700
      Re: A New Forth anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2016-10-08 18:03 +0000
        Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 11:13 -0700
    Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-08 11:17 -0700
    Re: A New Forth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 14:44 -0700
      Re: A New Forth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 14:53 -0700
        Re: A New Forth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 15:04 -0700
        Re: A New Forth rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 22:55 -0400
  Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 12:11 -0700
    Re: A New Forth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-08 21:31 +0200
      Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 17:07 -0700
    Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-08 12:33 -0700
      Re: A New Forth missycurl@gmail.com - 2016-10-08 12:54 -0700
        Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-08 13:29 -0700
      Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 17:28 -0700
        Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-08 18:00 -0700
          Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-09 09:00 -0700
            Re: A New Forth luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-09 11:19 -0700
            Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 01:09 -0700
              Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 08:24 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 13:28 -0700
                Re: A New Forth "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-10-10 11:14 -1000
                Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 15:11 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 21:46 -0400
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 16:26 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 18:58 -0700
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 20:15 -0700
              Re: A New Forth Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 07:26 +0300
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 03:09 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 13:27 +0300
                Re: A New Forth lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 18:41 -0700
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 19:08 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 07:58 +0300
          Re: A New Forth franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-10-09 11:09 -0700
          Re: A New Forth lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 18:45 -0700
        Re: A New Forth albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-10-09 10:54 +0200
          Re: A New Forth missycurl@gmail.com - 2016-10-09 07:35 -0700
          Re: A New Forth Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-11 06:23 +0200
          Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 21:31 -0700
          Re: A New Forth franck.bensusan@gmail.com - 2016-10-15 00:26 -0700
        Re: A New Forth Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-13 19:16 +0200
          Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 11:46 -0700
            Re: A New Forth Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-13 19:04 +0000
        Re: A New Forth "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-15 20:07 +0000
    Re: A New Forth luser droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-08 13:56 -0700
  Re: A New Forth polymorph self <jackvanc3@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 19:58 -0700
  Re: A New Forth Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 19:22 -0700
    Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 20:18 -0700
      Re: A New Forth Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 11:14 -0700
        Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 14:22 -0700
          Re: A New Forth jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2016-10-11 15:11 -0700
            Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 18:03 -0700
          Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-11 15:13 -0700
            Re: A New Forth Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 17:52 -0700
              Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 19:55 -0700
              Re: A New Forth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 14:21 -0700
                Re: A New Forth hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 14:36 -0700
            Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 18:08 -0700
              Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-11 18:21 -0700
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:01 -0700
        Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 20:33 -0700
          Re: A New Forth Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 01:15 -0400
            Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 05:44 -0700
              Re: A New Forth Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 11:51 -0400
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 09:47 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-12 10:08 -0700
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 11:48 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-12 11:56 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:41 -0400
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 11:57 -0700
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:02 -0700
                Re: A New Forth Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 09:24 -0400
                Re: A New Forth Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 10:33 -0400
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 10:05 -0700
                Re: A New Forth jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-10-12 19:01 +0100
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 09:53 -0700
                Re: A New Forth fred <anon@example.com> - 2016-10-14 12:37 +0100
                Re: A New Forth jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-10-14 14:49 +0100
                Re: A New Forth trans <transfire@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 07:20 -0700
                Re: A New Forth jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-10-15 11:58 +0100
                Re: A New Forth tabcomputing@gmail.com - 2016-10-15 10:21 -0700
          Re: A New Forth Chris Curl <ccurl609@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 04:33 -0700
  Re: A New Forth Whammo <sidciavic@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 12:23 -0700

csiph-web