Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Avoid treating the stack as an array [Re: "Back & Forth" is back!]
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2024 09:10:58 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <878qvu2p2l.fsf@nightsong.com>
References: <nnd$61e0ad9a$48ed61c2@b4d945e456041481>
	<vasqjd$icjm$1@dont-email.me> <66d26c4b$1@news.ausics.net>
	<vaubf7$tbke$1@dont-email.me> <nnd$04cff141$0193ba04@301336b8dd8ed69a>
	<vbfqnd$v4c4$1@dont-email.me> <nnd$26b4d59b$27bdb181@ce638e508b04426e>
	<87bk0vbvgk.fsf@nightsong.com> <66e0fa58$1@news.ausics.net>
	<66e11d64$1@news.ausics.net> <877cbh4b6z.fsf@nightsong.com>
	<66e2a497$1@news.ausics.net>
	<2024Sep12.121903@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<66e37b37$1@news.ausics.net>
	<05fd5a0056972ac60f43598f23a170ad@www.novabbs.com>
	<66e40a42$1@news.ausics.net> <87o74r3kjo.fsf@nightsong.com>
	<66e4564c$1@news.ausics.net> <87cyl6396z.fsf@nightsong.com>
	<66e579f9$1@news.ausics.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2024 18:10:58 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0315275eb18b2549130ca2e89cc80271";
	logging-data="1642834"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+7b/Q8hzcCFlQU/ZgYCnZA"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Jc1abgLdsfLrfnJyEFWY27DmMv8=
	sha1:MlfMEXNE3NZhOe6NkGVMUcKVyeU=
Bytes: 2311

dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> writes:
> Compiling under DX-Forth resulted in a code size of 23 and 26 bytes
> respectively.  Under VFX ...

I can't help it if those compilers generate worse code for the locals
version.  Can you conveniently try lxf?

> Not only were you able to read forth code, the result was more
> efficient. 

Sometimes it isn't too hard to read, sometimes it takes head scratching,
and sometimes I can't make any sense of it.  The function Anton posted
was an example that didn't make sense.  I remember thinking I might sit
down and try to figure it out to rewrite it, but it doesn't seem worth
the effort.

Anyway, if efficiency was important for that example, I'd use CODE.