... I'm writing a traditional ITC FORTH implimentation on my favourite ... I am starting to think that DOCOL does to. Previously, my EXIT routine...I have just convinced myself that DOCOL does indeed need a CFA ...Its task is to pop the Forth instruction pointer from the return stack...EXIT was executing. As others wrote, DOCOL is not like a normal Forth word, DODOES neither. Its function is...

....googlegroups.com>, MarkWills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: Hi there, I'm writing a traditional ITC FORTH implimentation ... be considered a 'special' routine? Traditionally DOCOL is am assembler label in Forth's... It probably is not visible from Forth. Certainly it is not so in figForth or ciforth. Mark Wills UK Groetjes Albert -- -- Albert van der Horst,...

MarkWills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: Hi there, I'm writing a traditional ITC FORTH implimentation on my favourite processor, the very..., stackless). I have a question regarding DOCOL. Should DOCOL follow the 'norm' of having a CFA (... or can it be considered a 'special' routine? DOCOL is, traditionally, just the ;CODE part of : ....

..., I'm writing a traditional ITC FORTH implimentation on my favourite ...I am starting to think that DOCOL does to. Previously, my EXIT ...I have just convinced myself that DOCOL does indeed need a CFA ... I think it should be: docol data $+2 mov r3,*r5+ ... have it executing a simple FORTH thread too: BEGIN 1+ 2+ ... questions about out of date implementations! Many thanks Mark Wills UK