Tamas Rudnai wrote:

>> FORTH! The answer is always FORTH.
> 
> How fast is Forth on PIC? Forth was designed onto a stack based
> machine, was not it? And PIC (mid-range) need to emulate a stack
> using indirect addressing, so I thought it might not be very fast but
> I might wrong? Or maybe not slower than any other interpreter?

I don't think that it's any slower than what a BASIC or Pascal p-code
(or any other) interpreter would do. They all have to have some
structured means of indirectly addressing variables and function
arguments; on a more "common" architecture, that's naturally the machine
stack, but on a PIC that would be something else -- but still the same
mechanism, whether you call it an emulated stack or something else.

Gerhard
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist