Re: Assembler or machinecode.

Dr Nick Maroudas wrote:

> On Apr 8, 2005 07:43 PM, Chris Walton wrote:
>
> You know, bootsectors etc. can be written in forth if
> you compile16-bit code (one block different) and just
> insert a hard jump
>
>
> On Apr 8, 08:08 PM,  Terry Loveall wrote:
>
> While porting 4word to linux I encountered the above
> problem of inline opcode compilation without comments.
> (snip)
> Rather than putting together a sub-set of an assembler,
> I just commented the new inline opcodes with their Intel
> memnonics. Maximum efficiency of size and readability.
>
> Old 16-bit definition:
> macro : 2*    [ $ e0d166 L ] 3, ] ;
>
> New 32-bit definition:
> macro : 2*    [ $ e0d1 L ( shl eax,1) ] w, ] ;
>
> The really tough discipline is keeping the comments up
> to date...
> Regards,
> Terry Loveall
>
If   we put an assembler into colorForth  it should be an
edit time aid  that is an extension of the editor.
As yellow assembler words are executed they are inserted
at the edit cursor as comments with the   machine code.

Entering:
: 2*    [ shl eax,1] ;
would appear as:
: 2*    [ $ e0d1 L ( shl eax,1) ] w,  ;
in the source.

The  assembler is optional in the editor  and is not needed at load time.
The assembler is just  a programming aid and not need if implemented 
this way.

Robert