Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.UUCP (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Category 1,  Topic 45
Message-ID: <107.UUL1.3#5129@willett.UUCP>
Date: 4 Jan 90 21:08:57 GMT
Organization: Latest Link in ForthNet Chain
Lines: 54

Category 1,  Topic 45
Message 9         Sat Dec 30, 1989
F.SERGEANT [Frank]           at 15:44 CST

  MOVEL, LMOVE, L@, @L, LC@, C@L

SP> So by all means, keep doing it @L.

  Steve, I haven't really started calling it @L yet.  I'm still using L@. I
just think consistency suggests that if I call LMOVE MOVEL that I should also
call L@ @L.  I actually prefer the name LMOVE to MOVEL, however, I have
changed it to MOVEL in v1.2 of Pygmy.  And thanks for the extra history on
this subject.

DaR>The reasoning as it is explained in MASM is so that it is DaR>easier to
add offsets to a FAR address.

   I am suspicious of any reasoning offered by Microsoft.

 RB> Oops, there is at least one counterexample.
 RB> PC83 uses a trailing "L" for segment-on-top words.

   Bob, you were my rock in this sea of confusion.  Now, I suppose I'll drown.

ZE> However, from a human User/programmer point of view having ZE> the segment
followed by the offset seems the easiest to handle.

ZE> As I have said ... I prefer the naming as LMOVE & LFILL

  Zafar, I agree with both points.

ZE> ... I would think the top of the stack is the place ZE> ... to see the
parameters that are apt to change most. ZE> ... I must be missing something.

  For clarity I prefer    SEG  OFFSET  L@  to  OFFSET SEG L@. Although maybe I
could live with either.  However, here is what Bob meant, I think:

  Suppose you want to access video memory, you could write a general purpose
word for it like this    : VID@  ( offset - byte)  $B800  LC@ ; more easily if
the least changing number was on top.  If the least changing number was on the
bottom, you'd have to write it this way : VID@ ( offset - byte)  $B800 SWAP
LC@ ;  It is similar to the benefit in writing DO LOOP words where the
starting index is specified in the word but the limit is not, eg  : STARS  ( #
-)  0 DO   STAR   LOOP  ;

  To summarize, you all make a lot of sense.  Currently I prefer the leading L
but with seg below (preceding) offset.  But, I'm going to watch for situations
where have the seg on top would be better.  The best solution might be to quit
using Intel processors.

  -- Frank
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated program.
Report problems to: 'uunet!willett!dwp' or 'willett!dwp@gateway.sei.cmu.edu'