[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Gforth BLOCK 0

From: Bernd Paysan
Subject: Re: Gforth BLOCK 0
Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2022 16:48:30 +0200

Am Samstag, 6. August 2022, 16:39:06 CEST schrieb Josh Grams:
> IIRC 0 isn't a valid block number: for instance,
> says "An ambiguous condition exists if u is zero or is not a valid block
> number."
> I believe in some systems blocks were actually the raw disk, so the
> bootloader would be in block zero and thus it wasn't available for
> source code? I could be totally wrong about that.

Originally, in Gforth, block 0 did not exist, for that reason.  However, other 
systems had block 0, which you just couldn't load from, so we changed the 
block numbering scheme to accommodate that.  But the code was written around 
the assumption that block 0 does not exist.

Fixed in current git head.

Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o id: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]