From: no.email@nospam.invalid   
      
   albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl writes:   
   >>My own idea of purity says to use a simple interpreter and accept the   
   >>speed penalty, using CODE when needed.   
   >   
   > Indirect threaded code is a clear expression of programmers intent.   
   > The only requirement for an optimiser is that the results are the   
   > same. The program can be shorter or faster.  Locals are a hindrance.   
      
   Well, the philsophical idea I'm coming from is that Forth is a difficult   
   languge that makes unusual demands on the programmer.  That is a cost of   
   using it.  In exchange it gives extreme simplicity and clarity of   
   implementation, and the ability to host itself on very limited machines.   
   Those are benefits.   
      
   If you're going to implement an optimizing compiler, you've got the   
   machine resources to host it and the willingness to deal with its   
   complexity.  That is, you're not really in need of Forth's benefits.  So   
   maybe you can also bypass some of its costs.   
      
   Thus, I think of a "pure" Forth as a simple interpreter (maybe not   
   ITC).  Once I have a bigger machine etc., I start thinking about Lisp.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)