Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages.

From	Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages.
Date	2017-05-27 11:53 -0500
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<ogcann$q5d$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <ogb1gb$pui$2@dont-email.me> <ogb4dg$11e$1@dont-email.me> <ogb4vt$1f4$1@dont-email.me> <ogc2ke$d2$1@dont-email.me> <ogc8td$ko1$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 5/27/2017 11:22 AM, rickman wrote:
> Cecil Bayona wrote on 5/27/2017 10:35 AM:
>> On 5/27/2017 1:09 AM, rickman wrote:
>>> Cecil Bayona wrote on 5/27/2017 1:59 AM:
>>>> On 5/27/2017 12:09 AM, rickman wrote:
>>>>> Cecil Bayona wrote on 5/26/2017 3:49 PM:
>>>>
>>>>>> Currently I use Dr. Tings eForth to Meta-compile a Forth for FPGA 
>>>>>> CPUs
>>>>>> and it does a good job but I would like to have my own software. 
>>>>>> Maybe
>>>>>> I'm wrong here and continuing this approach is not a bad option.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any suggestions, opinions, or general comments would be appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> "I would like to have my own software".  Why is this important?  I
>>>>> don't get it.  If you have software you can use as you wish, why does
>>>>> it matter who wrote it?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Having total control so it can be the way I want it can be important. I
>>>> really don't know of any Forth whose main goal is easy porting which is
>>>> the most important feature I desire. Most Forth are either all
>>>> assembler, or a mix of assembler and Forth, either one is hard to port,
>>>> there are a few written in C but they fail at being simple to 
>>>> understand
>>>> and change.
>>>>
>>>> eForth is the closest to those goals that doesn't break the bank and
>>>> there are a multitude of architectures available, Indirect Threaded,
>>>> Direct Threaded, Subroutine Threaded, and even Token Threaded versions
>>>> of eForth so in the end that might not be a bad way to go but no matter
>>>> what when a new FPGA CPU or an existing one is modified one needs to
>>>> port the software to the new device.
>>>>
>>>> Before I put a lot of effort into creating something from scratch it
>>>> might be worth the effort to attempt to port an existing eForth version
>>>> to a different CPU and see how practical that is. port ep16 eForth to
>>>> become ep32 eForth that would be a nice test as I have working ep32
>>>> software to compare it to. If it works OK then no need to write 
>>>> anything
>>>> from scratch just port a new version as needed. ep16 CPU eForth to J1
>>>> CPU eForth might also be a nice test since the CPUs are quite 
>>>> different.
>>>
>>> If the Forth is not written in assembler, how would it be ported to
>>> custom CPU designs?  Actually I have no idea where you are going with
>>> this.  You talk about writing a "super easy to port" Forth, but I
>>> haven't read how you might go about this.
>>>
>>
>> If the primitives are written in C then a recompile with a C for a
>> different CPU would generate a Forth for that CPU. Some minor work on
>> the I/O words might be needed but that is relatively simple.
>>
>> A custom FPGA CPU would not have a C compiler but in any case is would
>> still be not that difficult to write an assembler to be used in creating
>> the primitives, in some cases the CPU instructions are the primitives so
>> that is easy to implement.
> 
> Do you see the problem with these two statements?  According to your 
> concept you would be keeping N versions of your Forth, one in C and many 
> in assembly.

An assembler version would be a rare thing, it's just an option that is 
available if the extra work is merited but for most I would not need it. 
One starts with the C version for most CPUs that is good enough.
> 
> I would also point out that in addition to needing a C compiler for each 
> target, you will still need to change the source code to account for 
> differences in hardware.

C is available for just about every CPU in existence except custom FPGA 
and that is handled by a simple assembler and Meta-compiler.

> 
> Try looking at existing implementations, Mecrisp would be a good 
> example.  It has been ported to many different CPUs with two mainstream 
> processor ISAs as well as some FPGA designs.  It is always done in 
> assembly, but that's not really an important factor.  The issue is each 
> version has to be different to account for differences in the hardware.
> 

Actually Mecrisp is not a great example, assembler is the least portable 
method there is, if it were in C one would use the built in libraries to 
setup the clock, and do I/O, part of that is telling the C compiler what 
device you are compiling it for and the C compiler will take care of the 
differences assembler does not do that for you.

I currently use C and Pascal with embedded CPUs, switching chips used is 
not a major problem, part of the project settings is identifying the CPU 
used and the compiler takes care of the details. So this is a minor 
issue, that is one reason for using C one can re-compile software for 
different CPUs with at most minor software changes, the big minus is 
that it's not as fast as assembler, with a lot of CPUs it's still fast 
enough so not big deal.

-- 
Cecil - k5nwa

Thread

Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-26 14:49 -0500
  Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. minforth@arcor.de - 2017-05-26 13:17 -0700
    Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-26 17:53 -0500
      Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-05-26 22:31 -0700
        Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 00:57 -0500
  Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-27 01:09 -0400
    Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 00:59 -0500
      Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-27 02:09 -0400
        Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 09:35 -0500
          Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-27 12:22 -0400
            Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 11:53 -0500
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-27 13:13 -0400
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2017-05-27 12:24 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 13:13 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2017-05-27 13:33 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-27 14:53 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 14:44 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-05-28 10:09 +0200
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 12:57 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 12:14 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-05-28 16:11 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 02:11 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-29 01:54 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 03:22 -0400
    Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 15:46 -0700
  Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-05-27 01:23 -0500
    Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 09:29 -0500
      Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-05-27 11:36 -0700
        Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 14:25 -0500
      Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Rod Pemberton <NeedNotReplyHere@xrsevnneqk.cem> - 2017-05-27 21:58 -0400
    Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-27 11:20 -0700
      Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-27 15:20 -0400
      Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 14:20 -0500
        Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-27 18:33 -0400
          Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 18:50 -0500
            Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-27 20:13 -0400
          Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-05-28 10:23 +0200
            Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 12:26 -0500
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-05-30 04:22 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-05-30 11:49 +0200
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2017-05-30 05:07 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2017-05-30 18:58 +0200
            Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 12:28 -0500
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-05-28 20:14 +0200
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 14:08 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-05-29 10:52 +0200
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-29 12:50 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-29 19:06 +0100
        Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-27 20:00 -0700
          Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-27 22:29 -0500
            Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-27 22:10 -0700
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 11:22 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-28 14:45 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-28 18:25 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 21:43 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-06-01 11:27 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-06-01 12:50 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-06-01 12:47 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-06-01 16:23 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-06-01 16:32 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-06-01 12:08 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-06-01 21:47 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-06-02 06:34 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2017-06-02 07:13 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-06-02 07:57 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-06-03 02:17 +0200
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 21:07 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-28 21:48 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-29 00:52 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-29 09:17 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-29 12:16 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-29 19:21 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-29 23:13 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-05-30 01:07 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-30 15:54 +0100
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Alex <alex@rivadpm.com> - 2017-05-29 19:02 +0100
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 11:06 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-29 19:29 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-29 23:01 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-30 14:53 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-05-29 13:59 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-29 17:03 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-29 19:37 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-29 22:52 -0500
            Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 11:49 -0700
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 14:12 -0500
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 02:35 -0400
          Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2017-05-27 21:04 -0700
            Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-27 21:56 -0700
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2017-05-28 01:10 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 13:21 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2017-05-28 11:53 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-28 15:09 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 02:40 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2017-05-29 13:10 -0700
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 00:57 -0400
          Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 02:17 -0400
            Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 11:50 -0500
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 13:52 -0400
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2017-05-28 13:47 -0500
                Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 03:19 -0400
              Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-05-28 15:40 -0700
  Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 16:31 -0700
    Re: Forth Implementations advantages and disadvantages. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 20:17 -0700
      Opinions on a C language header for words? Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 21:38 -0700

csiph-web