Hi there,

I'm writing a traditional ITC FORTH implimentation on my favourite
processor, the very old TMS9900 (RISC, stackless).

I have a question regarding DOCOL.

Should DOCOL follow the 'norm' of having a CFA (code-field address) or
can it be considered a 'special' routine?

I couldn't get things working until I realised that EXIT needed one,
and I am starting to think that DOCOL does to.

Previously, my EXIT routine was:

exit dect r5
mov *r5,r3
jmp next

However, NEXT expects a CFA, so I changed it to:

exit data exit1
exit1 dect r5
mov *r5,r3
jmp next

(just added a pointer which points one (16 bit) word forward).

MarkWills yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

DOCOL is, traditionally, just the ;CODE part of : .

Therefore, DOCOL doesn't have a CFA as it's not a word, but
: does.

Andrew.

In article l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
MarkWills yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Traditionally DOCOL is am assembler label in Forth's that are
implemented in assembler. It probably is not visible from Forth.
Certainly it is not so in figForth or ciforth.

Groetjes Albert

Op Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:19:51 -0700 (PDT) schreef MarkWills:

On Sep 19, 3:19 am, MarkWills yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

On Sep 19, 6:43 am, Andrew Haley
wrote:

Mark Sorry. I realize that I didn't include docol so here it is.

Ho yes! I've written reams of code for that CPU, and there are bank
note sorting
machines out there with my code in them. There certainly used to be a
FIG listing
for the 9900, and it may be on Taygeta.

If you have a box that can read Sage CPM68k 5.25" floppies or
Marinchip MDEX 8"
floppies, there's a cross compiler for the 9900 somewhere in the
building ... but
wait, two floppies dated August 1986 have been found and transferred
to my PC!
They claim to be a 9900 cross compiler. Those in dire need should know
how to
find me.