Hi John, interesting stuff. We are getting a bit off-topic, hopefully
others don't mind. I joined the party in the 90s, I remember HP pa-risc,
Sun Sparc, SGI Indigo workstations. Intel and PCs were just establishing
their foothold. I haven't really worked with the Alphas. It sounds like you
have a lot of material for some interesting blog posts if you were so
inclined.

Best regards,
Martin

On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 12:54 PM John Sarabacha <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Again Martin,
> These emails are for when you have trouble sleeping (will put you asleep).
> Bill Gates hired Dave Cutler away from DEC (who worked on vms 32 bit
> operating systems) to bring forth (no pun intended) Windows NT (their 32
> bit version of windows) and it carried on from there to this day. So
> software engineering is a surviving skill through time. Hope some of the
> younger readers of these emails understand this, you work with hardware but
> don't get constrained by it.
>
> Regards,
> John S
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 12:07 PM John Sarabacha <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Again Martin,
> > How things have changed, when I worked at DEC (PDP11s, VAX, Alpha ...)
> > many years ago where are they (DEC) now?
> > Part of HP now, did you know that DEC was offered to own unix (turned it
> > down). They were also the 1st to use expert systems to configure PDP,
> Vax,
> > microVax, ... hardware configurations. HP was the 1st to bring out RISC
> > processors and DEC responded with their 64 bit RISC Alphas. Now the
> > chinese are dominating the RISC market using royalty-free RISCV core
> chips,
> > ARM (risc) is still ahead for the time being in high end processors. The
> > Cortex-M7 platform that I referenced before is approx 35$us and it easily
> > outperforms the dated DEC Alpha which at one time ran the internet search
> > engine of choice. Just ranting on in my so-called retirement years.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > John S
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 10:07 AM John Sarabacha <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Again Martin,
> >> A lot of useful information from that link, thanks again. There is a
> >> temptation to use C for these core (foundation words - mcu assembly
> words)
> >> since compilers these days can generate very efficient code. The issue
> is
> >> amForth tries to be compatible with the 2012 forth standard whereas
> other C
> >> based forths like ueForth don't. It still makes more sense just to make
> the
> >> adjustments to amForth assembly code keeping in mind the C forth code
> >> (looked at) compiled with -S (for the assembler code) may deviate from
> this
> >> standard.
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
> >> John S
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 9:15 AM John Sarabacha <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanks Martin,
> >>> That information saves me a lot of time, what I was also thinking of
> >>> doing is letting the compiler tell me
> >>> how to be compatible, this is where ueForth (being in C) can help, for
> >>> each C word compile with -S and
> >>> see what the assembly listing looks like and compare this to what the
> >>> amForth word has and make the adjustments.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks again,
> >>> John S
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 8:52 AM Martin Kobetic <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi John,
> >>>> That is a sweet looking board. I need to resist the urge to get one
> too.
> >>>> I've got plenty that I didn't even use yet :).
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not that well versed in ARM yet, but the errors sound like the
> >>>> instruction mode
> >>>> is being switched around for some reason. Maybe we need to ensure
> >>>> somehow
> >>>> that
> >>>> it sticks with Thumb? There may also be some issue with interworking,
> I
> >>>> haven't quite
> >>>> wrapped my head around that either. A lot to do still.
> >>>>
> >>>> Some interesting references
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28669905/what-is-the-difference-between-the-arm-thumb-and-thumb-2-instruction-encodings
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://developer.arm.com/documentation/dui0203/j/interworking-arm-and-thumb/about-interworking
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> Martin
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 12:40 AM John Sarabacha <[email protected]
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > Hi Martin,
> >>>> > The Cortex-M7 doesn't like the assembler instructions for arm/words,
> >>>> some
> >>>> > examples:
> >>>> > ./words/dup.s:4: Error: Thumb does not support this addressing mode
> >>>> -- `str
> >>>> > tos,[psp,#-4]!'
> >>>> > ./words/nip.s:4: Error: instruction not supported in Thumb16 mode --
> >>>> `adds
> >>>> > psp,#4'
> >>>> > ./words/abs.s:4: Error: Thumb does not support conditional execution
> >>>> > ./words/abs.s:5: Error: incorrect condition in IT block -- `b
> DO_NEXT
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Tried different options for the GCC compiler/assembler without
> >>>> success.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > FYI
> >>>> > John S
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 1:13 PM John Sarabacha <
> [email protected]>
> >>>> > wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > > Hi Martin,
> >>>> > > Some information on my Cortex-M7 based target platform, Arduino
> >>>> > > development environment is being is used
> >>>> > > https://www.pjrc.com/store/teensy41.html
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > Regards,
> >>>> > > John S
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 12:04 PM John Sarabacha <
> >>>> [email protected]>
> >>>> > > wrote:
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >> Hi Martin,
> >>>> > >> I will be trying to host amForth on an arm-m7 (600Mhz) platform
> >>>> which
> >>>> > was
> >>>> > >> being evaluated a few years ago. I will be using the same process
> >>>> as I
> >>>> > used
> >>>> > >> for CH32X033. Any learning I will pass on, M7 is significantly
> >>>> different
> >>>> > >> than M4 so by sticking to thumb type instructions there should be
> >>>> some
> >>>> > >> common issues.
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> Regards,
> >>>> > >> John S
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Amforth-devel mailing list for http://amforth.sf.net/
> >>>> [email protected]
> >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amforth-devel
> >>>>
> >>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amforth-devel mailing list for http://amforth.sf.net/
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amforth-devel
>

_______________________________________________
Amforth-devel mailing list for http://amforth.sf.net/
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amforth-devel

Reply via email to