Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!glasgow!orr
From: orr@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Fraser Orr)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Thinking FORTH
Message-ID: <1550@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>
Date: 1 Aug 88 11:23:14 GMT
References: <8807251832.AA03400@jade.berkeley.edu> <1534@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <2479@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: orr%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nss.ucl.ac.uk (Fraser Orr)
Organization: Comp Sci, Glasgow Univ, Scotland
Lines: 15

In article <2479@pt.cs.cmu.edu> ns@cat.cmu.edu (Nicholas Spies) writes:
>A couple of years ago Alan Winfield (University of Hull, GB) showed a Forth
>computer implemented in microcode at the Rochester Forth Conference. The C
>provided with it ran at 1/3rd the speed of the underlying Forth...
>So there... :-)

Hmmh, interestingly enough, I know of a certain 68000 machine, 
that runs a simulator for a 6502 machine. Suprisingly the 68000
simulator runs slower than the original 6502, therefore (this is
a Nicholas Spies version of therefore) the 68000 is a slower processor
than the 6502, QED. ;^>

==Fraser Orr ( Dept C.S., Univ. Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK)
UseNet: {uk}!cs.glasgow.ac.uk!orr       JANET: orr@uk.ac.glasgow.cs
ARPANet(preferred xAtlantic): orr%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk