Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
compile to ram compile to flash
33 views
Skip to first unread message
Michael
May 29, 2012, 5:50:26 PM5/29/12
to
Hi.
Is there a comon used notaion or name for a forth word to redirect
compilation memory segments? So compilation of new definitions may go
into RAM intstead of flash memory for example?
MSP430 intructions execute in both memory segments, RAM and flash
alike. So I would like to test compile to RAM, and when definition is
ok, append it to flash memory.
In mecrisp this switching words are COMPILETORAM and COMPILETOFLASH
but thats to long words for me.
How about: [RAM
Regards, MIchael
Is there a comon used notaion or name for a forth word to redirect
compilation memory segments? So compilation of new definitions may go
into RAM intstead of flash memory for example?
MSP430 intructions execute in both memory segments, RAM and flash
alike. So I would like to test compile to RAM, and when definition is
ok, append it to flash memory.
In mecrisp this switching words are COMPILETORAM and COMPILETOFLASH
but thats to long words for me.
How about: [RAM
Regards, MIchael
Bernd Paysan
May 29, 2012, 7:31:53 PM5/29/12
to
RAM
ROM
That's what I'm using on Gforth-EC for the R8C. It's "ROM", not flash,
for traditional reasons.
--
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/
Elizabeth D. Rather
May 29, 2012, 8:43:05 PM5/29/12
to
and text in 2 formats at this location
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Comp/comp.lang.forth/2007-06/msg00283.html).
These principles have been in use for commercial cross- and
metacompilers for nearly 20 years, and cover your question plus many more.
Cheers,
Elizabeth
--
==================================================
Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784
5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
http://www.forth.com
"Forth-based products and Services for real-time
applications since 1973."
==================================================
Alex McDonald
May 30, 2012, 5:14:39 AM5/30/12
to
On May 30, 1:43 am, "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erat...@forth.com> wrote:
> On 5/29/12 11:50 AM, Michael wrote:
>
> > Hi.
>
> > Is there a comon used notaion or name for a forth word to redirect
> > compilation memory segments? So compilation of new definitions may go
> > into RAM intstead of flash memory for example?
>
> > MSP430 intructions execute in both memory segments, RAM and flash
> > alike. So I would like to test compile to RAM, and when definition is
> > ok, append it to flash memory.
>
> > In mecrisp this switching words are COMPILETORAM and COMPILETOFLASH
> > but thats to long words for me.
>
> > How about: [RAM
>
> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard (links to overview
> and text in 2 formats at this locationhttp://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Comp/comp.lang.forth/2007-06/...).
> On 5/29/12 11:50 AM, Michael wrote:
>
> > Hi.
>
> > Is there a comon used notaion or name for a forth word to redirect
> > compilation memory segments? So compilation of new definitions may go
> > into RAM intstead of flash memory for example?
>
> > MSP430 intructions execute in both memory segments, RAM and flash
> > alike. So I would like to test compile to RAM, and when definition is
> > ok, append it to flash memory.
>
> > In mecrisp this switching words are COMPILETORAM and COMPILETOFLASH
> > but thats to long words for me.
>
> > How about: [RAM
>
> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard (links to overview
> These principles have been in use for commercial cross- and
> metacompilers for nearly 20 years, and cover your question plus many more.
>
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth
>
> --
> ==================================================
> Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
> FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784
> 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
> Los Angeles, CA 90045http://www.forth.com
> metacompilers for nearly 20 years, and cover your question plus many more.
>
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth
>
> --
> ==================================================
> Elizabeth D. Rather (US & Canada) 800-55-FORTH
> FORTH Inc. +1 310.999.6784
> 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
>
> "Forth-based products and Services for real-time
> applications since 1973."
> ==================================================
De facto it may be; why not get it Forth200x de jured?
> "Forth-based products and Services for real-time
> applications since 1973."
> ==================================================
Stephen Pelc
May 30, 2012, 7:15:07 AM5/30/12
to
On Wed, 30 May 2012 02:14:39 -0700 (PDT), Alex McDonald
<bl...@rivadpm.com> wrote:
>> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard (links to overview
>> and text in 2 formats at this locationhttp://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arc=
<bl...@rivadpm.com> wrote:
>> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard (links to overview
>hive/Comp/comp.lang.forth/2007-06/...).
>> These principles have been in use for commercial cross- and
>> metacompilers for nearly 20 years, and cover your question plus many more=
>> These principles have been in use for commercial cross- and
>De facto it may be; why not get it Forth200x de jured?
job for both of us. The proposal was designed over a couple of days on
a blackboard in Waterloo about 15 years ago. There are some aspects
of the proposal which need rework.
Stephen
--
Stephen Pelc, steph...@mpeforth.com
MicroProcessor Engineering Ltd - More Real, Less Time
133 Hill Lane, Southampton SO15 5AF, England
tel: +44 (0)23 8063 1441, fax: +44 (0)23 8033 9691
web: http://www.mpeforth.com - free VFX Forth downloads
Michael
May 30, 2012, 12:38:18 PM5/30/12
to
On 30 Mai, 01:31, Bernd Paysan <bernd.pay...@gmx.de> wrote:
..
Since COLD brings me back to compile into flash in its last saved
status, there is no need for a ROM word. (4e4th).
Thanks. Michael
..
> RAM
> ROM
>
> That's what I'm using on Gforth-EC for the R8C. It's "ROM", not flash,
> for traditional reasons.
So I name it simply RAM then.
> ROM
>
> That's what I'm using on Gforth-EC for the R8C. It's "ROM", not flash,
> for traditional reasons.
Since COLD brings me back to compile into flash in its last saved
status, there is no need for a ROM word. (4e4th).
Thanks. Michael
Bernd Paysan
May 30, 2012, 1:25:25 PM5/30/12
to
Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard
4€4th is not a cross compiling system, it compiles to either flash or
> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard
RAM *on the target*.
Elizabeth D. Rather
May 30, 2012, 1:34:22 PM5/30/12
to
On 5/30/12 1:15 AM, Stephen Pelc wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 02:14:39 -0700 (PDT), Alex McDonald
> <bl...@rivadpm.com> wrote:
>
>>> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard (links to overview
>>> and text in 2 formats at this locationhttp://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arc=
>> hive/Comp/comp.lang.forth/2007-06/...).
>>> These principles have been in use for commercial cross- and
>>> metacompilers for nearly 20 years, and cover your question plus many more=
>
>> De facto it may be; why not get it Forth200x de jured?
>
> Because Leon and I have other things to to. It's an "ample spare time"
> job for both of us. The proposal was designed over a couple of days on
> a blackboard in Waterloo about 15 years ago. There are some aspects
> of the proposal which need rework.
The basic concepts may have been designed "over a couple of days" but
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 02:14:39 -0700 (PDT), Alex McDonald
> <bl...@rivadpm.com> wrote:
>
>>> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard (links to overview
>>> and text in 2 formats at this locationhttp://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arc=
>> hive/Comp/comp.lang.forth/2007-06/...).
>>> These principles have been in use for commercial cross- and
>>> metacompilers for nearly 20 years, and cover your question plus many more=
>
>> De facto it may be; why not get it Forth200x de jured?
>
> Because Leon and I have other things to to. It's an "ample spare time"
> job for both of us. The proposal was designed over a couple of days on
> a blackboard in Waterloo about 15 years ago. There are some aspects
> of the proposal which need rework.
the document as posted is based on real implementations by FORTH, Inc.
and MPE, and many hours of work on articulating the concepts clearly.
That said, a lot of work has been done using this technology in 15
years, and it is certainly due for updating. That doesn't prevent the
existing documents to be a good starting place for folks writing in to
ask related questions!
I hope you and Leon get a chance to work on it soon. If you would like
to feed comments to me to incorporate in a new draft, let me know!
Elizabeth D. Rather
May 30, 2012, 1:35:45 PM5/30/12
to
On 5/30/12 7:25 AM, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard
>
> 4€4th is not a cross compiling system, it compiles to either flash or
> RAM *on the target*.
>
Even so, you could use the same nomenclature, and may find some other
> Elizabeth D. Rather wrote:
>> Please refer to the proposed cross-compiler standard
>
> 4€4th is not a cross compiling system, it compiles to either flash or
> RAM *on the target*.
>
ideas in these documents helpful.
0 new messages