1) I have a Zybo Z7-20, MicroZed, DE-10 Nano and a BeagleBoard X15. So I am well equipped in the hardware department. That does not count a pile of MSP430 and ARM boards which already have Mecrisp installed or available.
2) I have Vivado installed in a Windows VM, but decided that I really needed to run that on bare hardware, so I have a Win 7 instance and am going to be installing 18.3 on Debian shortly along with the Cyclone V dev tools. I hope to make Debian my primary dev platform for all things which will run on Linux. My mainstream DSP system is Solaris 10 u8 which I keep offline on an isolated network as it is old and vulnerable. But the Sun/Forte development tools are the best I've used and I have a fair number of customizations implemented for that.
3) I like forth. It is elegant. It is both an operating system and a language and was created specifically for embedded development. I know of no other system that is self hosting on minimal hardware. Forth will let you test your code and *then* compile it. So far as I know, everything else is the opposite.
I use FORTRAN for numerical work, awk for string processing and C for systems work. So it is natural for me to choose a language for embedded work designed for the task. If it proves awkward I can always switch to C. I doubt that I'll need to do that.
A large part of the appeal of forth for this is it gives me bare metal control. That is not provided by Vivado. They are attempting to solve an NP-hard problem by means of various heuristics. You do not know what it will do. I don't intend to try to use every last gate. Just what fits the task conveniently.
When I think about a computer or software running on one, I think about it in terms of what is going on at the wire and gate level, not at the language construct level. For someone with that viewpoint, forth is a natural fit. I look at the FPGA as a big wirewrap frame with lots of parts waiting to be connected. For that, the designer takes responsibility for the timing. Seymour Cray cut all the wires the same length. I shall need to do the same.
I wouldn't dream of asking Matthias to port Mecrisp to the Zynq. He's finally finished his PhD after far too many years. He needs to devote himself to his profession, not his hobby. I'm sure I'll have some questions, but he has always been very gracious in all the years we have corresponded. Besides, I'd be embarrassed if I could not do this on my own, though in all fairness his inner interpreter scares me a bit as it is more complex than the model I learned 35 years ago on a 6502.
Before I start on forth on the Zynq I'm going to work through the Zynq tutorials for the MicroZed. That is what I bought it for. After I got the Zybo I was rather put off reading "this example is unsupported" comments. That screams "prima donna" to me. Having worked with such people, I don't like them. Avnet cares a lot more about their user base.