|
Of course... maybe...
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Re. Gaston, please see my [Edit] in the post before
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cool.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
It's amazing they were able to decode the notations into something that can create real music.
According to wiki (?) lyres date back to 2500 BCE.
Gives a new meaning to guitars.
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
If you like to listen to old music (although not by far as old as the one you refer to) played by recognized old music ensembles, listen to l'Arpeggiata and Vincenzo Capezzuto: Wondrous Machine[^]. Played at the sound level of heavy rock, it becomes heavy rock
The lyrics is a praise of the machine, dating back to 1692, 72 years before James Watt made a breakthrough with his steam engine. Good old Henry (and his lyrics companion Nicholas Brady) was definitely ahead of their time!
|
|
|
|
|
trønderen wrote: If you like to listen to old music I do. It gives a sense of placement with our species, if that makes sense.
Will totally check that out that link in a bit. Thanks.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you
|
|
|
|
|
#Worldle #369 3/6 (100%)
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟨↙️
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟨↗️
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🎉
https://worldle.teuteuf.fr
binary search no map
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
|
Looks pretty flakey to me - there is no data redundancy built in.
|
|
|
|
|
We were finally moving to a SoC with 128 kB of flash and 16 kB of RAM (starting from 64 / 6) and now they want to cut costs moving back to a 64 / 8.
I really really wanted to see what we could do with that ocean of RAM...
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
128k, that doesn't sound like enough space to hold the Google starting page?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
It is enough to run Wizardy 1 and Zork 1 though.
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: I really really wanted to see what we could do with that ocean of RAM...
In the early 1980s, the 8-bit Commodore PET 2001 could play a decent game of chess with 8K of RAM (no flash!) for both code and data.
It was very slow, but it worked!
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Slow is cool, but when you have 125 microseconds to perform 3 tridimensional transforms in order to compute the timings of six MOSFETs, keep communication, manage the high level functionalities and the diagnostic services... you can't be slow
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
You work with microseconds ?!
Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
|
A fairly common occurrence in embedded products.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, directly in Interrupt Service Routines to keep an electric motor running at defined RPM and torque. Depending on the manifacturer you can have 4k or 8k samples per second in order to apply the Park and the Clarke transformations (and to run the PI observer). Such transformations are quite heavy since they are 3D geometrical tranforms in the Complex numbers.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
This is where assembler kicks in.
I think I would enjoy your job.
|
|
|
|
|
We actually don't need it here, SoCs are well designed and have 1 cpu-cycle RAM access that really helps, and the optimizer is good.
I had to turn to Assembler on an Intel system to perform high speed image manipulations (i.e. rotating an image 90 degrees in any direction with any mirroring in microseconds, normalizing the gray levels...). SIMD instructions are fun, even if SSE are asinine sometimes.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm. A 6502 running at a few GHz...
One thing is certain - you wouldn't need a heater in the car.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Hmmm. A 6502 running at a few GHz...
Don't you mean MHz?
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
6502 did run up to 3 MHz.
Imagine how it would perform at thousand times the original top speed! Apple II Mark II could turn out to be a hefty machine ...
I don't know enough of hardware to tell if it would be at all possible to make a 3 GHz version. You would probably have to abandon 99% of the implementation technology, but maybe you could retain the instruction set, memory model etc.
One of my dreams is that "someone" had the resources to pick up some of the concepts/architectures abandoned a generation ago because the technology wasn't ready for it. Take the iAPX 432, an object oriented machine taking the object concept to extremes. E.g. you could send an object to another process, but then you lost it yourself. Obviously, you would have to review and update the architecture; e.g. the original 432 could only offer 8 Ki objects per process. I am quite sure that the technology we have today would be capable of implementing a 432 Mark II that would both have sufficient functionality and performance to be useful.
I am not suggesting that you could make the market accept an object oriented processor, though. When anyone mentions the tremendous speed of technological change in the digital age, one of my primary counter arguments is that the 1978 X86 architecture still is dominating, 45 years later (although in revised versions - or cancerous versions, if you prefer).
|
|
|
|