On 22.1.21 17.03, gareth evans wrote:
> On 22/01/2021 13:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 22/01/2021 13:22, gareth evans wrote:
>>> In my retirement, I have some ideas on language
>>> development, essentially interactive as was BASIC
>>> and FORTH but running at the speed of compiled
>>> code, and the 64 bit ARM instruction set looks
>>> like a good starter.
>>
>> FORTH was good stuff speed wise
>>
>>
>
> I never used it in anger, but spent a lot of time thinking
> about it. I seem to have on my bookshelf most of the FORTH
> and TIL primers. I was considering something like a FORTH
> but not being based upon Reverse Polish.
>
> ISTR that FORTH on an RCA 1802 is in the Voyager missions?
>
> Now, that was a weird instruction set! ISTR 8-off 16 bit
> registers but no 16-bit moves, all having to be done in
> 8-bit chunks through the accumulator, and no conventional
> subroutine call but change which of the 16-bit registers
> at any time was the program counter!


FORTH is as much Reverse Polish (Lukasciewicz) as the older
HP calculators.

--

-TV

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05