 | | Re: TpForth Project ?
|
|
(...) compiling (...) to (...) Following Harald's suggestion yesterday I downloaded the (big) TPForth Developer Studio. My very first impression is it would be a very cool tool to use together with pbForth. In the comments field of the downloading (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
(...) I realized this later, and felt it would be even more confusing to clear it up! Mea Culpa again! (...) Great. I've been struggling with getting info for the FAQ together that makes it easy for all platforms to use pbForth. The goofy line-end (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
In response to a message by Ben Jackson, Ralph Hempel wrote: <snip> (...) Actually Ralph, I think that was me. :) Although there are a few things *I've* said about pbforth that I don't like, you've given your reasons for the choices you've made to a (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | TpForth Project ?
|
|
Ralph, You might want to check out the TPForth Developer Studio, a cross compiling Forth system for embedded apps. Seems to have a nice IDE (though not in Forth) that should be quickly adaptable to support pbForth. And it's free to non-commercial (...) (25 years ago, 10-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: pbFORTH needs better uploading, docs
|
|
Ben Jackson wrote.. (...) And Mark Terrabain replied... (...) I'm reluctant to take pbForth there because the RCX already compiles bytecodes and SAVE-SYSTEM sends them back to the host in Srecord format. Writing and testing a bytecode compiler for (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
