stevens@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Paul Stevens) (07/17/87)
One more for the head count. I am using 4xForth on 520ST. It is fast and powerful. But I only like things I have built myself so am attempting to create a forth-83 in assembly language. It has sorta begun to work. The real motivation was to create a forth with debugging tools. My version allows for interactive step by step execution at either the forth interpreter level or at the machine language level ( 68000 disassembler was a real chore ). You can plant breakpoints in either machine language or forth. Etc. All system machine language definitions and the dictionary are kept carefully protected from destruction by interpreted code. It adds two or three memory references for each loop through the inner interpreter but will make a much nicer language for someone to learn ( no bombs ). As a byproduct, the system and dictionary are in a separate 64k segment so that the compiled code has a full 64k all to itself. Now....I still have to do the assembler part. Another chore because of all the funny restrictions on addressing modes. Every instruction is different. The AND and OR are the same, for example, but the XOR is different! Does anyone have a 68000 assembler written to be used in the forth style? 4xForth has an assembler but does not come close to checking for all legal addressing modes. And I'm not too keen on the way it works. Seems to take too much space or something. Much harder to read than ordinary assembly language. Even if you have no assembler to offer, I would enjoy exchanging notes and war stories. Paul Stevens stevens@exec8.macc.wisc.edu MACC University of Wisconsin stevens@wiscmacc.bitnet Madison, Wisconsin 53706 (606)262-9618