Re: Language X, not Forth ?

[Rod Pemberton]

"sxccaa.email" <sxccaa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c5cea333-c43a-4aa2...@x25g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> it will not be forth but a language built on top of it ?
>

I see no reason why this couldn't be done. I've personally - in a very
limited and in a temporary situation - converted C into an IL (intermediate
language) which was _almost_ FORTH. It required some work: deblocking,
unrolling, un-parameterizing. So, I think it could be done with other
languages too, but I don't believe it'd be optimal. Any language which is
"Turing complete", can have a working computable language implemented for
it. The real issue is: "How does one convert one language to another
efficiently with programmatic methods?" The most efficient code written for
one coding model is usually inefficient when converted to a different model.
I.e., C on top of FORTH wouldn't be a good solution to implementing C
efficiently.

Rod Pemberton