Thank you, Tristan. I'll address the rest of your points inline. On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 4:04 AM <[email protected]> wrote:
> (1) RISC-V > I've asked my question on this separately. > (2) 32-bit ARM > > I don't know enough to comment, hopefully others on the > list will, and already have, thank you :) > The ARM implementation seems to behave the same way RISC-V does, so at least we're consistent there. > (3) What to do with the non-AVR codebase now? > > It is still an open question, and one with many > parts. The current SVN RISC-V codebase dates back to > 2019. I forked that in Oct 2023 for my own education, > but not in a way that would make updating the official > SVN repo easy. Additionally, whilst there is a good > deal of overlap (the virtues of an ITC VM) between the > AVR and 2019 SVN RISC-V codebases, the differences in > (1) dictionary layout (2) compilation storage media > (RAM, FLASH) mean that some "common" words are quite > different. > > Is it time to restructure and have a separate repo > for the 32 bit AmForth? > I'm brand new here, so I have very little standing in this kind of decision, but if I can offer my 2c, I'd say this: 1) I think removing obstacles to collaboration can be quite important in keeping a project alive. I hope I don't offend anyone by saying that I've left sourceforge and svn behind more than 20 years ago, and that I find git and places like github significantly superior. I do think that moving project activity to a more convenient/powerful platform could be quite helpful to keep things moving. 2) Notwithstanding what I said in 1) fracturing what is possibly not a very large community will have significant costs as well, so should be taken with extreme caution. At the very least it should probably be undertaken with the input of as many members as possible. Best regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Amforth-devel mailing list for http://amforth.sf.net/ [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amforth-devel
