[retroforth] Re: RetroForth 8.0
- From: aprice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: retroforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:25:57 -0800
>>> My only concern here is: does it involve an extra jump for every
> invocation of the 'does' word?
No. does> changed a jump (call dovar) to (call code_after_does) and
inserted a bit of "fixup" code after does> and before allowing the
compiler to continue. My does word inserts a single call followed by a
ret. does> ended up inserting more jumps overall (the fixup code made
use of an additional subroutine).<<
Cool! Sounds neater generally.
>>> >Blocks: These will be part of the 8.0 core.<
>
> I would prefer loadable personally, but not a biggie. :)
The problem here is that we have to have a way to load things. I can
do blocks, which are easily portable across OSes (including the
native version) or files, which tend to be a bit trickier to deal with
IMO. A fixed-size blockfile is enough to let us load and enable
full-scale file I/O, so I see this as the best route.<<
Ah, I see. Makes total sense. :)
Andy
Andrew Price
C.T.O.
HealthSpace Integrated Solutions Ltd.
HealthSpace USA Inc.
Tel. (604) 860-4222
http://www.healthspace.com
Other related posts:
