Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: anthk <anthk@openbsd.home>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: SUBLEQ and EForth
Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 05:59:46 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <slrn102adau.qi8.anthk@openbsd.home.localhost>
References: <slrn1028oma.22hk.anthk@openbsd.home.localhost>
 <nnd$53733cb4$746018fa@83b3bbb0a1b2f081>
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 07:59:46 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f7bf73e41e72577c9a22bb70e90992c0";
	logging-data="259611"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18tjanFh0Xo4sAKd4t+YNSb"
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (OpenBSD)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7FsDXCZM1g64fxi6Ge2DeuniaQE=

On 2025-05-14, Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14-05-2025 11:31, anthk wrote:
>> Run it as ./subleq ./subleq.dec
>
> I can't - it complains:
>
> $ pp4th -x subleq.4th < subleq.dec
> Error: Not a 16-bit SUBLEQ VM
>
> Hint - no, it's not YOUR subleq interpreter ;-)
>
> Hans Bezemer
>
>

The Eforth code from the repo requires a 16 bit wide subleq machine.
Both subleq and muxleq (the last one it's much faster) in C 
from Richard James Howe (same author)  work seamlessly.

https://github.com/howerj/subleq/

No, is not my interpreter, I barely expanded the Perl one for Muxleq 
and it was just slightly faster but Perl had atrocious performance.
Even gawk (mawk ran really well)  ran it much faster.