[SLOF] [PATCH] slof/engine.in: remove the "COMPILE" keyword

[Kautuk Consul]

Hi Segher,

On 2024-01-23 16:11:14, Kautuk Consul wrote:
> On 2024-01-23 11:00:31, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > On 23/01/2024 10.48, Kautuk Consul wrote:
> > > On 2024-01-23 10:43:48, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > > > On 23/01/2024 10.38, Kautuk Consul wrote:
> > > > > "COMPILE" isn't being used anywhere in the Forth code as it is
> > > > > currently only being used for "+COMP" and "-COMP" keywords.
> > > > > Remove this keyword definition and use the standard "DOTICK <word> COMPILE,"
> > > > > mechanism as is being used by the rest of the compiler.
> > > > 
> > > > "compile" is defined by IEEE 1275, so I doubt that we should remove it?
> > > > 
> > > >   Thomas
> > > Oh yes it is. So we can keep that keyword for maintaining the standard.
> > > But can we at least use DOTICK <word> COMPILE, for +COMP and -COMP
> > > as that seems to be more efficient than utilizing the return stack in
> > > the "COMPILE" does ?
> > 
> > Sounds like a reasonable optimization to me at a quick glance. But maybe
> > Segher could also comment on this, he's more experienced in this SLOF engine
> > stuff than anybody else.
> So, 2 questions for Segher:
> i)	Can we use the standard DOTICK DOCOL COMPILE, and DOTICK SEMICOLON
> COMPILE, method for +COMP and -COMP respectively ? That seems to be more
> efficient as that doesn't use the return stack.
> ii)	Instead of EXIT used in -COMP can we use SEMICOLON instead to
> compile into HERE ? That seems to be in line with how the col() macro
> is defined and gives better information to the reader of this code that
> the compiler is trying to generate the same "DOCOL <forth words> SEMICOLON"
> format of defining subroutines.

Any comments on this ? It's been a week or so. :-)