On compiling. (Was a way off topic subject)

dwight dkelvey at hotmail.com
Wed Jun 23 18:50:52 CDT 2021

How you'd do such in Forth depends on the threading method. You have Indirect threaded, direct threaded and call threaded. As you move to the right, they are faster and easier to add optimization but harder to deal with some of the higher level operations like Create Does> ( older Forth would be <Builds Does> ).

From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> on behalf of Van Snyder via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2021 11:42 AM
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: On compiling. (Was a way off topic subject)

On Wed, 2021-06-23 at 13:36 -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> Typical FORTH implementations are neat in that respect, since they
> use a threaded code encoding that allows for fast and efficient
> switching between threaded code (subroutine calls) and straight
> machine code.

I have a vague recollection of a story about a FORTH processor that put
the addresses of the functions to be executed on the return-address
stack (68000?) and then executed a RETURN instruction.

More information about the cctalk mailing list