Hello, answering late ...
On 06/06/2013 09:37 PM, Enoch wrote: > Hello AmForth-ers, > > Can somebody give me good reasons why we should not convert words/*.asm > implementations (as much as possible) from VM assembly to AVR > assembly. Isn't this about the usual tradeoff between "portability" and "speed/size"? A Forth system can be implemented with as little as 7 words written in assembly. This stuff is simpler to port to the next controller, or at least less work. So the next question is: is this "keep the assembly part as small as possible" credo important for amforth? Probably not, because it is designed to run on "atmega" exclusively. The "atXmega" stuff has been largely abandoned, if I remember correctly. So, no, apart maybe from readability of the code there is not much to say against using more assembly. AVRStudio is in my case not an argument at all, because I do not use it. Cheers, Erich ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments: 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services 3. A single system of record for all IT processes http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j _______________________________________________ Amforth-devel mailing list for http://amforth.sf.net/ Amforth-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amforth-devel
