Why is VLIW FORTH better suited than FORTH for JVM applications?

[A Man Crying Alone In The Wilderness]

other than the extreamly obvious, in built priority plexing of
sixteen cores processing machine instructions, in a parallel DSP
fashion, fit within an uniform and high efficiency dynamically
re-definable MPP /crossbar/ any-channel to any-channel multiplexer ,
(
URL ,
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.machine/msg/b400d03ddc0f5a4f?dmode=source&hl=en
,
URL ,
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.machine/msg/b400d03ddc0f5a4f?dmode=source&hl=en
,
URL ,
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=VLIW&start=0&enc_author=UMMf9RgAAAB028iMl1-EGchWGfA9OZiJwdEhmbh6wtHbY0AV513Zgw&
for other nifty checks and balances, )

VLIW is an object size like instruction, operating at a /bear metal/
hardware layer protocol.

Java compilers calculate the final size of Class file format objects,
However, with traditional FORTH, any object model is permited, so most
do not include
the size of a ROMable COLON definition, for example.

IEEE 1275 Open Firmware, URL,
http://playground.sun.com/pub/p1275/home.html
, is the closest to a standard object format, however, does not
include a VLIW sizeof load characteristic.

a VLIW protocol requires that all exectuable objects have a pre-defined
cache package load size.

Happy new years, wishing for goodness for 2006,

maw

---