Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!amdahl!amdcad!cayman!tim
From: tim@cayman.amd.com (Tim Olson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: FORTH, RISC, and other new architectures
Message-ID: <26604@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Date: 4 Aug 89 00:56:28 GMT
References: <385@ryn.esg.dec.com> <975@key.COM> <26573@amdcad.AMD.COM> <12989@well.UUCP>
Sender: news@amdcad.AMD.COM
Reply-To: tim@amd.com (Tim Olson)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Austin, TX
Lines: 24
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:

In article <12989@well.UUCP> jax@well.UUCP (Jack J. Woehr) writes:
| 	VERY Interesting!!! Just got hold of the 29000 User's Manual
| today, thanx to AMD's eager and friendly marketing division. Is this
| to be taken to mean that you have a Forth up and running on some 29000-based
| boards or machines? More info, please!

No, just in the "thinking about the problem" stage, right now.

| >Second, does a typical FORTH program (coded with in-line primatives and
| >call-threaded) spend most of its time executing FORTH primatives or
| >executing the thread of control for user-written words? 
| >
| 
| 	Depends on the programmer, the system, etc., but the answer would
| tend towards the latter.

That is what I suspected.  It would then seem to be adventageous to
optimize for fast function call and return (threading) at the expense of
primative speed.


	-- Tim Olson
	Advanced Micro Devices
	(tim@amd.com)