Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: My 1802 has been running code for me for 32 years today!

Expand Messages
  • jdrose_8_bit
    I knew about the FORTH processors. Thank you. However, I was thinking there are microprocessors that run even higher level languages like BASIC, Java and
    Message 1 of 28 , Apr 29, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      I knew about the FORTH processors. Thank you.

      However, I was thinking there are microprocessors that run even higher level languages like BASIC, Java and FORTRAN natively. Perhaps I am mistaken in how they operate.

      --- In cosmacelf@yahoogroups.com, Lee Hart <leeahart@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > Charlie Moore, the creator of the FORTH language, has been doing this
      > for many decades. Since FORTH is a pretty low "high level language", it
      > is easy to make special-purpose CPUs that run FORTH directly.
      >
    • Chuck Bigham
      It depends on what you mean by natively. Microcontrollers like the Picaxe and BASIC Stamp have a built-in interpreter for BASIC, and that s the way that you
      Message 2 of 28 , Apr 29, 2013
      • 0 Attachment

        It depends on what you mean by “natively.” Microcontrollers like the Picaxe and BASIC Stamp have a built-in interpreter for BASIC, and that’s the way that you program them. But the interpreter is an assembly language program pre-programmed into the underlying processor (PIC for the Picaxe, I’m not sure what for the Stamp).

         

        In that sense you could have a “native” processor for even 4th-generation languages like C# and Visual Basic – just build an IL interpreter in assembly language for the target processor – and then download the IL files from the .NET compilers.

         

        Chuck

         

        From: cosmacelf@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cosmacelf@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of jdrose_8_bit
        Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 10:12 AM
        To: cosmacelf@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [cosmacelf] Re: My 1802 has been running code for me for 32 years today!

         

         

        I knew about the FORTH processors. Thank you.

        However, I was thinking there are microprocessors that run even higher level languages like BASIC, Java and FORTRAN natively. Perhaps I am mistaken in how they operate.

        --- In cosmacelf@yahoogroups.com, Lee Hart <leeahart@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > Charlie Moore, the creator of the FORTH language, has been doing this
        > for many decades. Since FORTH is a pretty low "high level language", it
        > is easy to make special-purpose CPUs that run FORTH directly.
        >

      • Lee Hart
        ... There is a fuzzy border between a true HLL (High Level Language), and a CPU that truly executes machine code. Lots of HLL compile into a byte code, which
        Message 3 of 28 , Apr 29, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          On 4/29/2013 12:12 PM, jdrose_8_bit wrote:
          > I knew about the FORTH processors. Thank you. However, I was thinking
          > there are microprocessors that run even higher level languages like
          > BASIC, Java and FORTRAN natively. Perhaps I am mistaken in how they
          > operate.

          There is a fuzzy border between a true HLL (High Level Language), and a
          CPU that truly executes machine code.

          Lots of HLL compile into a byte code, which is a compacted form that is
          easier for a real CPU to emulate. The byte code then gets compiled or
          interpreted into the CPU's native instruction set. Smalltalk, BASIC,
          ucsdPascal, FORTH, and Java are some examples that come to mind.

          But in a few cases, CPUs have been built that can "directly" execute one
          of these byte codes. The trouble is that "directly" often means by using
          microcode, or a program in ROM. In effect, they modified the CPU's
          native instruction set to be more like the byte code. Smalltalk, the
          LISP machine, and Moore's FORTH engines took this approach. The CPU
          doesn't literally execute the English language version of the source,
          but it does directly execute the byte code.

          In the past, the amount of hardware needed to directly execute source
          code would have been staggering. But today, it's not all that hard to
          imagine doing, especially with HLLs that aren't all that "high".
          --
          If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?
          -- Albert Einstein
          --
          Lee A. Hart, http://www.sunrise-ev.com/LeesEVs.htm
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.