Subject:
|
RE: FW: Something else is needed, I think...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 May 1999 00:40:55 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Ralph Hempel <rhempel@^antispam^bmts.com>
|
Viewed:
|
865 times
|
| |
|
|
John Tamplin wrote:
> The problem is he doesn't understand how forth works (no offense intended).
> Basically, all you save is the actual parser -- there is no "compiler".
> A typical forth implementation (and I have no idea if this relates to pbForth
> at all) translates forth code like this:
>
> 0 getvar 1 getvar exch
>
> into a sequence of codes like:
>
> pushint(0) call(getvar) pushint(1) call(getvar) call(exch)
I hope I'm not the "he" in this sentence - otherwise it's a pure accident
that pbFORTH works :-) You have got the basic idea here, John. It gets
interesting when you can factor repeated code snippets into words and
then use them in a bigger application.
> Personally, forth is a bit low-level for me. One thing that might help
> people use it would be a library mechanism that would keep word definitions
> on the host and then download them so you don't have to keep duplicating
> them. It could be as simple as a #include mechanism.
Again, the library mechanism is as complicated as users want to make it. I've
given the basic txt file as a "script". There are lots of ways to
make a piece of code include its dependent words and automatically
create a script. The librabry is just a database of text...
Hey, I could probably write a "make" for FORTH words...that would be trivial :-)
Seriously, the trick is to let the tool grow with the user base. If they
don't like it at all, make a new tool...
Cheers,
Ralph Hempel - P.Eng
------------------------------------------------------
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.
Indside of a dog, it's too dark to read...
------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: rhempel at bmts dot com
------------------------------------------------------
--
Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: FW: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) The problem is he doesn't understand how forth works (no offense intended). Basically, all you save is the actual parser -- there is no "compiler". A typical forth implementation (and I have no idea if this relates to pbForth at all) (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
32 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
