On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Matthias Trute <mtr...@web.de> wrote:
> > > Of course you'll blow the return stack pretty fast without tail > > call elimination. I confess I've looked at all the available Forths > > for the AVR so I can't remember if AmForth provides this > > capability. > > The amforth compiler does absolutely no optimization at all. simple > and straight 1:1 code generation. > > Certainly that is clear and easy to understand. For a trampoline table it's quite sufficient to declare the table as a var, then the loop, then the instructions which call the loop, and lastly stuff the table. The indirection is not thereby increased, as it would be for a single mutual recursion. In avrforth http://krue.net/avrforth/control/ there's a separate `;` and `;;`. Would it be possible to add a `;;` that behaves like the `;` in avrforth? An explicit tail call elimination allows for a few recursive patterns that are quite natural to write. I'm afraid I don't understand AmForth's model in enough detail to know if this is possible. cheers, -Sam. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Amforth-devel mailing list for http://amforth.sf.net/ Amforth-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amforth-devel
