On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 03:02:02PM -0400, Matt Wilbur wrote:
> Correct.  I am working on a project that uses a MIPS processo embedded
> ...
> I need the 64-bit PicoLisp, but MIPS isn't one of the
> architectures currently supported.

Now I understand.

> I started to look at how things
> are done for ARM and intel, but don't have the time right now to
> properly add MIPS.

This is the right place. A MIPS port would probably be similar to the arm64 and
ppc64 versions. But it is indeed a nasty piece of work. Each of the existing
ports took me several weeks. Funny thing is that the most tedious part was
always the floating point support (despite PicoLisp does not have floats in the
language, it must support them on the VM level for 'native' calls).

> So, I got the 64-bit PicoLisp compiled in emulator mode, after
> cross-compiling sysdefs, capturing the output in a text file, and then
> using that output in places where the output from sysdefs was read via
> a pipe.

OK, good. The drawback with emu is the slow execution speed though.

> I had assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that, using emu, VM bytecode was
> created on the fly and that it gets "executed"

The bytecodes (if we may call 16-bit words "bytes") are created at build time,
as you will have noticed, in the generated C source files.

> I am completely open to the idea that I am being completely wrong
> headed about something.

Not wrong at all. The problem is only the missing MIPS port ;)

♪♫ Alex

UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Reply via email to