[sdiy] uC languages

[John L Marshall]

I was being funny. I supose that rules out the PDP-8S (one bit serial
accumulator).


----- Original Message -----
From: patchell <patchell at silcom.com>
To: <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: [sdiy] uC languages


>
>
> John L Marshall wrote:
>
> > Wasn't the PDP-8 the ultimate RISC? Eight instructions? Only one
branching
> > instruction.
> > In the early days, Bad Bill of Redmond, Washington wrote all his
> > applications on a PDP-10 (2060).
> >
>
>     Generally, in order to be considered "RISC",  each instruction needs
to
> execute in one machine cycle.  Although, even for a RISC, there are a few
that
> won't, but most do.
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Magnus Danielson <cfmd at swipnet.se>
> > To: <buchty at cs.tum.edu>
> > Cc: <sschneid at bigpond.net.au>; <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
> > Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 7:13 PM
> > Subject: Re: [sdiy] uC languages
> >
> > > From: Rainer Buchty <buchty at cs.tum.edu>
> > > Subject: RE: [sdiy] uC languages
> > > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 03:03:29 +0100 (MET)
> > >
> > > > > (In fact I love 68K assembly the most)
> > > >
> > > > 11th commandment:
> > > > Thou shalt not use any assembly language besides 6502 and 6809.
> > >
> > > Not entierly correct. If you are fluent in PDP-11 or VAX-11 that is
> > > accepted too. If you usually hack on your private PDP-10 or Cray-1,
> > > then you are certainly allowed to deviate!
> > >
> > > Nobody has volenteered to do an Alpha based thing! I *really* want one
> > > ;O)
> > >
> > > But seriously. People complain about not being able to get C compilers
> > > for microprocessors. There is one out there which do have things like
> > > ARM, AVR, 68k, 68HC11, S390 support and you can find out more about it
> > > here:
> > >
> > > http://www.fsf.org/software/gcc/gcc.html
> > >
> > > You can (if you are a bit handy) add more support to it.
> > >
> > > It does quite alot of various optimization tricks and they keep adding
> > > to them. There are allways some commercial compilers that are better
> > > on some architecture, but GCC do a hell of a job most of the
> > > time. It's not bad. There are still things to improve, but that is
> > > especially on modern RISCs.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Magnus
>
> --
>  -Jim
> ------------------------------------------------
> * Visit:http://www.silcom.com/~patchell/
> *-----------------------------------------------
> *I'm sure glad Merry Christmas comes just once a year
> * -Yogi Yorgensen
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>
>