On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Ray Racine <ray.rac...@gmail.com> wrote: > A couple of years ago or so, time does run like water, Larceny merged in a > x86 assembler which 100% scheme. If I recall the original project was 100% > standalone x86 assembler / linker.
It's Jonathan Kraut's Sassy (http://sassy.sourceforge.net/). There's a Chicken egg of it available as well. -- Alex > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Stephen Bloch <bl...@adelphi.edu> wrote: >> >> On Sep 25, 2012, at 7:38 PM, Hugh Aguilar <hughaguila...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> I am writing a Forth system. I want it to be interactive in the usual >> Forth way. This means assembling a function at run-time and immediately >> being able to run the assembled function. >> >> ... I'm much better off if I can just assemble the functions at run-time >> for the Forth system (which is compile-time for the user's Forth program). >> >> >> The traditional way to implement a Forth compiler, IIUC, isn't to >> generate executable machine code at all, but rather to generate a sequence >> of word-references that are interpreted as procedure calls by the Forth >> interpreter (which is in native executable code, but written in advance). >> >> Or are you talking about some kind of JIT compiler? >> >> Stephen Bloch >> sbl...@adelphi.edu >> >> who last implemented a Forth system in 1983; I presume things have changed >> since then! >> >> >> ____________________ >> Racket Users list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users >> > > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users