Re: !p+, and thank you Jeff

hubuli wrote:
The "codelet"

@p+ b! @b push
channel-address
for @b !p+ next

pushes a count onto the return stack. My thinking ia that "for" would
not occupy an instruction slot. It should just serve as jump target for
"next", making room in slot3 (three bits) for the argument of "next".

That's a very good guess. Actually FOR compiles a count push and
does a begin to leave an address. So you have an extra push. Had
you used begin with next or replaced the push with the for etc. it
would have been a bit more standard. You are close but we use
a few more techniques to enhance that.

NEXT is older than the rest of the instruction set but was not
present on the 21 series.

Yes, there are some guesses here:
1. It's possible to identify "this instruction word" via the 3bit
argument.
2. The core recognizes this and does not reload the instruction word.

Close.

I also assumed that "next" would remove the loop count, when the loop
is finished - there is no reason for this assumption from the papers.

That is traditional.

We could live with the count remaining, if the following (loaded) code
removes the count by convention.

Opcode explanatiions in chars that offer at most a half dozen words
are not going to give you all the details or show examples of how
they are used in context.

If there are things that have not yet been posted there is a reason for
this. This is why I asked people to just show a tiny bit of patience.
Of course if people want to make trouble they can do the opposiite
of what I asked, and jump in with speculation to do just what I
asked they not do.

If I say that I we are not suppose to say something this week and
that people have been asked to show a little courtesy rather than
do damage by posting what we said we shouldn't post this week,
or play hot/cold / twenty questions to try to get me to get into
trouble by releasing the information that I said I wasn't suppose
to relase this week.

Now I realize that getting me into trouble at work, or causing
trouble for the company would delight certain individuals in this
newsgroup to no end. And in the past whenever I have said
that I had to wait a week to answer a question or said that I
could not comment on such topics as open litagation, in
essesnce any time I say that my hands are tied and that
I ask people to show a little coutesty it becomes an opportunity
for certain people to cause trouble.

But if I say please don't do .... I know that certain people will
take this as an oppturnity.

At least I will be able to sort out the people who don't want to
cooperate with us and want to cause trouble from the people
who have a sincere interest.

I know that most of the accusations of lies, snake oil, cultism,
false benchmarks, false explanation of opcodes, false explanations
of software etc. have always come from a short list of people all
of whom frequent c.l.f and who probably feel compelled to prove
that all their accusations in the past that Chuck Moore and I
don't understand Forth, are lying about the chips and software
and all are still out to prove that they were always right in the
past.

From what I have seen most of what people remember in c.l.f
are the false facts and insults offered by these people and\
few people were able to sort out the actual facts from this
sort of nonsense when c.l.f has always been dominated by
'alternate theories' and a place where one could find
'alternate transcipts' where people take what Chuck or I
said and put it into some absurd context, like Perl code,
where it then becomes nonsense.

\whenever we say we will offer the facts, a lot of people
would rather offer guesses instead. And we know that many
of these will come from the historic detractors and haters.

The haters will tell you that the haters don't exist. And they
will tell you that people with functioning brains all know the
difference between the true facts and the bull***. But in
these same people are the source of bull*** and have always
offered ten times more bull*** than the facts offered by the
people in the know. And to this day what most people
remember is their bull***.

This is an easy thing to prove. If I offered a test I know that
people have been snowed by the volume of bull*** offered
by the haters in the past, and they are still confused since
most of the information that most people got in c.l.f in the
past were false guesses and intentionally twisted facts or
just nasty personal attacks.

But as I say, I can get a sense of who wants to cooperate and
who wants to support the haters or join their group. I realize
that they may not be a majority in c.l.f, but they post the
majority of what gets posted here. People probably know who
I think should be in that list and why.

I think I have been pretty clear that people can cooperate
or people can try to make trouble for us or for me. It is an
easy way to sort these people.

.

Loading