[retroforth] Re: Further thoughts on blocks
- From: "Ron Aaron" <ron@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: retroforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:04:34 -0800 (PST)
On Thu, January 20, 2005 10:56, Ton ´t Lam said:
>>
> Keep the code of rf clean. Better use the current way of including
> blocks (or a 'load') and then a store of the current Forth environment.
> This means that the new binary file has all words already compiled. Thus
> a next start of rf is faster. With the current available diskspace and
> memory the problem can't be that rf itself is 3000 or 5000 bytes.
>
> store ( a a # -- ) | address of command to execute, new file name
>
> ' doit " rf.new" store
>
> Then rf.new will start running 'doit'. A zero address causes rf.new to
> start in normal mode.
Do you have an implementation of 'store'? I would like one if you do (Win32
and Linux, please :-)
Ron
--
My GPG public key is at http://ronware.org/
fingerprint: 8130 734C 69A3 6542 0853 CB42 3ECF 9259 AD29 415D
Other related posts:
