> Jeethu Rao wrote:
> >Hey,
> >I believe a PIC can have a stack. This is especially true for 16f877.
> >On a 16f877, the RAM on bank 3 is used rarely and the 80 bytes of ram in
> >bank 4 is used very very rarely. So, if we could write a piece of code
which
> >could.....
>
Dan Michaels wrote
>
> You can certainly simulate a stack in s.w., but I think you
> might lose too much performance by trying to execute a language
> like Forth, which is so heavily stack-dependent, on a stock PIC.
> My guess is you would end up with something that would give a
> Basic Stamp a good run for its money.
>
> OTOH, maybe some of the newer PICs with better stack access
> and multiple FSRs would make a more suitable platform for Forth.
>
Hmm, I must revisit the Datasheets. Hardware Stack and 16 bits
are the main requirements if I remember correctly.

> [BTW, I am probably one of few piclisters who still uses Forth
> regularly - any others ???].
>
Own a set of reference books (all out of print), 4 Jupiter Aces, and still
wear the Kaftan. 8-)

2 projects under way at the moment using Forth

Chris Carr

> >Mike Hardwick wrote:
> >
> >>Well, if I had my 'druthers, I'druther have a first-class PIC Forth
> >>compiler. Compiled Forth seems more suited to small embedded systems
than
> >>anything else I've used. Interactive debugging, small code size, high
> >>execution speed, short learning curve, etc.
> >.........
> >
> >If only the Tin Man had a heart, the Scarecrow had a brain, and
> >the PIC had a stack.
> >
> >If only.
> >
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
> mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu