1. Euphoria machine code
Hi again!
I for one like Euphoria's in-line machine code very much!
It's great to keep a balance between high-level and low-level programming.
On one side Euphoria is the highest level language in the world, but on the
other side it's the lowest-level language in the world. It doesn't even have
ASM, it goes one lower, it uses pure machine codes to do inline hardware
stuff.
It's also great for writing emulators and OSs, because you can dynamically
append and prepend machine codes in memory and run them when you want to.
Also great to do a Native Interpretter. And with the
excelent ASM.E library you can even load ASM source from disk and run them
dynamically!
To make it short, I like the machine code very much, but I'm woundering if
they are implemented native or interpretted. If native, it's very fast, but
not portable at all. If it's interpretted, it's slower, but more portable.
Wich one is it?
Jason Leit,
Greetings! :)
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
2. Re: Euphoria machine code
On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 13:42:20 GMT, Jason Leit <jasonleit at HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
>Hi again!
>
>I for one like Euphoria's in-line machine code very much!
>It's great to keep a balance between high-level and low-level programming.
>On one side Euphoria is the highest level language in the world, but on the
>other side it's the lowest-level language in the world. It doesn't even
have
>ASM, it goes one lower, it uses pure machine codes to do inline hardware
>stuff.
>It's also great for writing emulators and OSs, because you can dynamically
>append and prepend machine codes in memory and run them when you want to.
>Also great to do a Native Interpretter. And with the
>excelent ASM.E library you can even load ASM source from disk and run them
>dynamically!
>
>To make it short, I like the machine code very much, but I'm woundering if
>they are implemented native or interpretted. If native, it's very fast, but
>not portable at all. If it's interpretted, it's slower, but more portable.
>Wich one is it?
What version of Euphoria are you using ???
My version does not support in-line machine code.
ASM.E was not written by RDS but is a library written by
a user, Pete Eberlein.
And what OS is written in Euphoria ??
3. Re: Euphoria machine code
Jason Leit writes:
> To make it short, I like the machine code very much,
> but I'm woundering if they are implemented native
> or interpretted. If native, it's very fast, but not portable
> at all. If it's interpretted, it's slower, but more portable.
> Wich one is it?
It's native.
The Euphoria interpreter calls your machine code,
and then the CPU executes your machine code
directly at full speed. When your code returns, the
Euphoria interpreter gets control again.
Depending on what you are doing,
the code is potentially portable between the Linux, DOS
and Windows platforms since they all use
386/486/Pentium CPU's.
Machine language calls are also
supported by the new compiler.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
