Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!VMT.SCP.AC.UK!I326
From: I326@VMT.SCP.AC.UK ("I326 at VMTEACH Jim N. Deakin")
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: eforth implementation
Message-ID: <9008152019.AA23821@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 15 Aug 90 15:17:43 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: "I326 at VMTEACH Jim N. Deakin" <I326%VMT.SCP.AC.UK@SCFVM.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 24

I'm looking at eforth, planning to convert it for a 68000 based machine,
and notice that the PC version uses separate code and name stacks. I know
that F-PC uses a similar system to get round the chip's 64k segment
limitations, but this eforth is contained in one segment, so I can't really
see any advantage in this system. This has probably been debated here before,
so I would appreciate it if somebody could explain it to me.
  Also, for anyone who knows, is this arrangement part of the eforth spec. ?
I would rather have the word's head and body contiguous, making for a simpler
memory map if it's up to the individual implementor.
   Thanks for any help,
.........................................................................

From:     Jim Deakin,    |
      Systems Support,   |          This space intentionally
Sheffield Polytechnic,   |
    Computer Services,   |                 left blank.
         Heriot House,   |
             S. Yorks.   |
              England.   |
.........................................................................
Email on:
JANET            : I326@uk.ac.scp.vmt
INTERNET or UUCP : I326%vmt.scp.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
.........................................................................