[REBOL] Re: facts we will have to face ...
From: carl:cybercraft at: 24-Oct-2001 21:07
On 24-Oct-01, Matt Fitzgerald wrote:
> Something like AMOS for the Amiga? :-) That was pretty damn fast...
Yeah - by accessing the hardware...
But no - not like AMOS! All you need to be able to do is convert one
file (or bitstream) to another format. That's all it should be for.
> Anyway, this would be a fairly good project to attempt, obviously
> one couldn't concurrently write such code for all processors (maybe
> they can, I couldn't!). I don't know much about writing hooks and
> stuff for Rebol but I _could_ see how a generic machine-code like
> language could be written in a Rebol-like syntax,
Forget the REBOL-like syntax. Keep it as near to machine-code syntax
as possible, so it can be made as fast as possible for each processor
it's converted to.
> mapping that
> syntax back to low-level machine code for individual architectures
> would be what you're trying to achieve. I guess you'd need some kind
> of in-memory assembler. If anyone wants to be more specific on this
> e-mail me, my Rebol skills aren't that crash hot, but I know 680x0
> pretty well!
> -Matt
> -----Original Message----- From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com]
> [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]On Behalf Of Carl Read
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 October 2001 6:16 PM To: [rebol-list--rebol--com]
> Subject: [REBOL] Re: facts we will have to face ...
> On 24-Oct-01, Petr Krenzelok wrote:
>>> So, how about if RT creates a simple virtual-processor and
>>> virtual-machine-code dialect
>> I am not sure it is so easy :-)
> I don't see why not. My suggestion is only for converting files, not
> linking to hardware. Perhaps virtual processor wasn't the right
> word. How about just a simple language for throwing bits and bytes
> around that runs as close to machine-code speed as possible?
> --
> Carl Read
--
Carl Read
