[<<][staapl][>>][..]
Sat May 30 09:05:05 CEST 2009

forth on forth

The proper way to have _both_ an anonymous compiler and a dictionary
compiler requires some juggling.

This is an energy sink..  It's clearly not anticipated in the design,
so I wonder if i should persue it.  The irony is that a threaded Forth
compiler is really trivial compared to one based on composition of
macros.

What should this be used for?
  - A standard Forth: yes
  - A standalone Forth: yes
  - Use inside native code: maybe

The important observation is that a standard Forth doesn't need the
"macro:" layer because it can be written entirely in the interaction
mode.  This is how it was implemented before.

In other words: the toplevel namespace module is better suited to a
standard Forth than the declarative module one.  Let's not waste too
much time on this.

Conclusion: there is no way around writing a full-fledged Forth
parser, which either runs on the target or on the host.  It's probably
possible to make some minor hacks in target-double: but that's what
they be: hacks.  Anyway, it really only needs ":" and "variable".

Then, maybe there really is no reason to first write a tethered
standard Forth and then make it stand-alone?  Probably best to have
only the standalone version.



[Reply][About]
[<<][staapl][>>][..]