[SLOF] [PATCH v2] slof/engine.in: refine +COMP and -COMP by not using COMPILE

[Kautuk Consul]

Hi Segher,
> 
> > > If you want to improve engine.in, get rid of it completely?  Make the
> > > whol thing cross-compile perhaps.  Everything from source code.  The
> > > engine.in thing is essentially an already compiled thing (but not
> > > relocated yet, not fixed to some address), which is still in mostly
> > > obvious 1-1 correspondence to it source code, which can be easily
> > > "uncompiled" as well.  Like:
> > 
> > :-). Getting rid of it completely and making the whole thing
> > cross-compile would require more time that I'm not so sure that I or
> > even my manager would be able to spare in our project.
> > 
> > > 
> > > col(+COMP STATE @ 1 STATE +! 0BRANCH(1) EXIT HERE THERE ! COMP-BUFFER DOTO HERE COMPILE DOCOL)
> > > col(-COMP -1 STATE +! STATE @ 0BRANCH(1) EXIT COMPILE EXIT THERE @ DOTO HERE COMP-BUFFER EXECUTE)
> > > 
> > > : +comp  ( -- )
> > >   state @  1 state +!  IF exit THEN
> > >   here there !
> > >   comp-buffer to here
> > >   compile docol ;
> > > : -comp ( -- )
> > >   -1 state +!
> > >   state @ IF exit THEN
> > >   compile exit
> > >   there @ to here
> > >   comp-buffer execute ;
> > > 
> > > "['] semicolon compile," is not something a user would ever write.  A
> > > user would write "compile exit".  It is standard Forth, it works
> > > anywhere.  It is much more idiomatic..
> > 
> > Okay, I can accept the fact that maybe we should use EXIT instead of
> > SEMICOLON. But at least can we remove the invocation of the "COMPILE"
> > keyword in +COMP and -COMP ? The rest of the compiler in slof/engine.in
> > uses the standard "DOTICK <word> COMPILE," format so why cannot we use
> > this for -COMP as well as +COMP ?
> > 
Do you all agree with the above reasoning as well as the fact that I think
we would all here (in the KVM team) appreciate even this small
improvement in performance ?
Can I send a v3 patch with the "DOTICK EXIT COMPILE," "DOTICK DOCOL COMPILE," changes ?