Forth like interpreter

[Greg Ewing]

"Samuel A. Falvo II" wrote:
> 
> And in terms of clock cycles, I'm dead positive the
> Intel solution is faster.

Well, you can't really compare speeds, because the last
PDP11 implementation built was several generations of
hardware ago...

> Your code lacks the code to push the old contents of R5 onto the stack

No, it doesn't! JSR R5,blarg pushes R5 onto the stack,
puts the PC into R5, and then jumps to blarg. That's
one of the reasons I used PDP11 instead of 68K. There's
no single-instruction equivalent in 68K. (Nor on any
other processor I've heard of...)

> I don't think processor wars benefit this discussion at all.

Not intending to fight a war -- just passing on something
neat I noticed one day. Completely useless nowadays of
course, and brazenly off-topic as well. Now back to our 
regular programme...

-- 
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept,
+--------------------------------------+
University of Canterbury,	   | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a	  |
Christchurch, New Zealand	   | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc.  |
greg at cosc.canterbury.ac.nz	   +--------------------------------------+