text stringlengths 0 99.6k |
|---|
What this file is: |
A lot of the mail I have been getting about Blazin' Forth concerns the |
use of CODE and ;CODE definitions, and combining assembly language with |
Forth. It recently occurred to me that a lot of people don't know how to |
use the Forth assembler - and are therefore missing out on a considerable |
amount of the power of the Forth language. So this is an attempt at a |
tutorial in using Assembler in Forth, and in using it in the BFC in |
particular. Much of what I say here should be applicable to other 6502 |
Forth implementations - but not necessarily all. Consider yourself warned. |
What this file is not: |
This is *not* a course in machine language programming. If you need |
information on the basics of using assembly language, then consult a good |
text - my personal favorites are the ones by Lance Leventhal, but there are |
many good ones around. |
General Considerations: |
Using CODE and ;CODE words are frowned upon in programs which attempt to |
be portable. In fact, the quickest way to insure that your programs are not |
83 Standard is to use the word CODE in them. |
Having said this however, there is much to be said for incorporating a |
few code definitions in Forth programs. Typically, a program will spend |
most of its time in one or two words - by recoding these words in assembler, |
the overall speed of the program can be increased manyfold - 50% increases |
or more are not unusual, and for very little work. |
Also, the incompatibility is not as great as it would appear at first. |
It is probably safe to say that the most popular 8-bit personal computers |
use the 6502 CPU (Apple II, C64 C128, Atari line etc.). As long as your CODE |
definitions are not accessing special hardware features (such as the SID |
chip in the C64) most code definitions will work on all computers using the |
same CPU. I have shared CODE definitions with friends who have Apples and |
Ataris running Forth, and I have never yet had to modify one. |
Finally, Forth is the easiest language there is to combine with machine |
language. Many of the hassles and problems ordinarily associated with |
combining high level languages and assembler simply do not occur in Forth. |
In other languages, the typical process is this: |
1: Write the high level program, and debug. |
2: Figure out where you need to speed things up. |
3: Fire up an editor, and write some assembly code. |
4: Assemble the file and - usually - run a loader program on that output. |
5: Load the Editor, and modify your higher level source. |
6: Compile your higher level source. |
7: Link the compiled program and the loaded assembly language program. |
8: When it doesn't work (which it won't, at first). Go back to step 3. |
There are also inevitable problems in passing parameters to and from the |
higher level code, and the inevitable problem of where to put the machine |
language. If you have ever done much of this sort of thing, you know what a |
headache these problems can be. |
These last two problems are usually the most difficult, and, you will be |
surprised, and possibly relieved to hear that they don't occur in Forth. At |
all. Ever. |
Combine that with a resident assembler and a resident editor and a |
resident compiler, writing Assembly language in Forth becomes almost |
ridiculously easy. |
A Quick Example: |
Since I have taken up so much of your time with the above advertisement, |
you would probably like me to put my money where my mouth is. Here is a |
quick example of what I was talking about above. I hope it's not too |
trivial, but the idea I want to get across here is the ease of combining |
Assembler with Forth. First, a high level Forth Program: |
: SHIFTLEFT ( -- N2 N1 ) // shift N2 left N1 times |
0 ?DO 2* LOOP ; |
: SHIFT-4 ( Just show what a left shift is ) |
100 0 DO I 4 SHIFTLEFT . LOOP ; |
Multiple left shifts are fairly common, and so SHIFTLEFT is likely to be a |
handy word in certain applications. As it is, it will run pretty quickly. |
But perhaps, for certain speed demons, not quickly enough, so you decide to |
recode the SHIFTLEFT primitive in Assembler: |
CODE SHIFTLEFT ( -- N2 N1 ) // shift N2 left N1 times |
BOT LDA, TAY, BEGIN, 0 # CPY, 0= NOT WHILE, |
SEC ASL, SEC 1+ ROL, DEY, REPEAT, POP JMP, END-CODE |
If you are used to conventional assemblers, this probably looks pretty |
weird. The important thing to notice here is that *only* SHIFTLEFT has |
changed - SHIFT-4 (or any other word which uses SHIFTLEFT) will work just as |
it did before, with the only change being the overall increase of speed |
which machine language naturally brings to any situation. Notice also that |
we didn't have to worry about where to put the code - it goes in the same |
spot our higher level SHIFTLEFT went. You will also discover, if you type |
this example in, that you don't have to call the assembler. This is all |
taken care of for you. As far as you, another user, or other procedures |
which use SHIFTLEFT are concerned, there is no difference between using the |
hi-level SHIFTLEFT and the CODE SHIFTLEFT. |
The Structure of a CODE definition: |
It's pretty straightforward. They all look the same: |
CODE [name] [assembler mnemonics] END-CODE |
Note the similarity to a colon definition: |
: [name] [forth words] ; |
How to Exit a Code Definition: |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.