Hi Tristan, This is interesting, they use portable C for forth, whereas my approach is to use portable C to deliver assembler code for forth, by creating an abstraction layer for the mcu. This allows you to interface C routines and keep the performance of assembly code.
Regards, John S On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 2:15 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi John, > > Interesting. > > A different target in that of an embedded mcu, but perhaps some > parallels with ATLAST [1]. The links in the Documentation section (of > [1]) give an interesting history and rationale. > > Best wishes, > Tristan > > [1] https://github.com/Fourmilab/atlast?tab=readme-ov-file > > > On 2026-01-23 18:40, John Sarabacha wrote: > > Hi Everyone, > > For using ITC and DTC based forth code the next step is making AmForth > > more > > portable. > > Any platform that supports C will be able to use amForth (as a > > subsystem). > > The terminology that I am using is that AmForth is the full > > independent > > system and amForth is a subsystem based on AmForth. > > The 1st step is moving the primary words to a form which is more > > portable > > across > > platforms using asm(...) calls with a C infrastructure. Then using this > > as > > a foundation for all the words. > > > > 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
