Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #23842

Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project?

Show all headers | View raw

hughaguilar96@yahoo.com wrote:
> Also, who cares if a 16 by 16 addition is complicated? After it is
> written, it is a black box to the user, just like your 16 by 16 addition
> which is written in VHDL

Verilog... I suppose when a 16 by 16 addition is complicated, it won't be 
that fast, *and*, what's more important to business, it will take a long 
time to write.  This is somewhat tolerable, if you have people working at 
minimum wages for you... but time to market usually matters.

> --- the user doesn't concern himself with the
> internal workings of all this stuff, whether it is assembly-language or
> VHDL.

This is not the Forth philosophy.  The user has a big picture of what 
problem he's solving, and understands how he does it.  This big picture is 
what you always avoided.

> It was expected at Testra that almost all users would just program
> in Forth, as the assembly-language was way too difficult for most people
> to learn. I've read a book on VHDL, and it looks relatively easy compared
> to MiniForth assembly-language --- but I've never actually tried VHDL, so
> I don't really know how easy or difficult it is. I have programmed in
> MiniForth assembly-language, so I do know what it is like.

Verilog is even easier than VHDL.  There are people with different mindsets 
clashing in the hardware description language universe, especially the EEs 
who went from schematics to Verilog or VHDL have a hard time understanding 
code written by software people.  But after all, Verilog is a C-like 
language with events (used for clocks) and concurrent assignments.

>> That's not what I do.
> 
> Your way is just not robust. You are limited to 32 (or 64) primitives,
> which isn't enough. Even if one or two thousand primitives seems like a
> lot, I think everybody can agree that several hundred are needed.

What I have are *instructions*, not *primitives*.  Instructions like your 
assembler has instructions - and I suppose it had a pretty limited number of 
instructions, as the CPU was tiny.  You write code by using instructions.  
There can be applications where you need a different set of instructions, 
but since Verilog is pretty easy (easier than assembler!), you can just 
change the processor and add those instructions.  Or remove instructions you 
don't need...

> Even if you increased the number of primitives, for example to 512 which
> would be a reasonable number, your system is still not robust. The only
> way you have to write primitives, is VHDL.

And the only way to write MiniForth primitives is an assembler which is 
clearly more complicated than VHDL.  Do you think that's a good idea?

> Every primitive that you write,
> increases the complexity of your processor --- this makes it more and more
> difficult to fit it into the small chips, and you end up needing big
> expensive chips.

That's why I restict my instructions to simple things, and do more complex 
things by using sequences of these simple instructions - in high level, if 
you wish so.  It's a pretty fast high-level.  You need a way more 
complicated convencional CPU and a way more complicated Forth compiler to 
achieve similar per-cycle performance - a 486 with bigForth is about as fast 
per cycle on the sieve benchmark I once did.

> It is much more robust to have an assembly language to write primitives
> --- then you can have hundreds or even thousands of primitives, without
> increasing the complexity of the processor at all.

I still think this is a fundamental design mistake to write 100s or 1000s of 
primitives in a complicated assembler.  The thing my coworkers liked from 
the b16 is that you write your code in something a bit higher level than the 
common assembler - in Forth.  There are no real "primitives" on a Forth CPU.

> All in all, I am not interested in processors such as the B16 with their
> tiny set of canned primitives --- they are a dead-end, because they can't
> really be expanded beyond being toy processors --- they don't scale up.

Yes, but that's not the intention.  If it takes a few days to write a 
specialized processor for the toy problem at hand, *just do it*.  I wrote an 
entire processor including tool chain in less time than it typically takes 
to port a Forth to a normal idiosyncratic controller.  I don't care that 
Gavino or whatever idiot it was can't have a b16 with a Firefox browser.

There are a lot of small problems, and Forth is particularly good at solving 
small problems.  If you like to solve big problems, go and use some other 
language.  We Forthers rather redefine the problem until it becomes small 
enough to be solvable with Forth.  And I certainly don't believe in "one 
size fits all".  You can barely fit 20% of the US population into an XXXL T-
shirt, but in China, you can use that as family tent.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-16 23:17 -0700
  Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-17 14:19 +0200
    Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-17 16:04 -0700
    Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-17 16:15 -0700
      Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-18 00:01 -0400
        Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-19 15:33 +0200
          Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-19 17:25 -0400
            Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-19 17:00 -0700
              Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-20 18:35 -0400
          Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-19 17:38 -0700
            Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-20 12:51 +0200
              Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-06-20 15:28 +0000
              Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-20 18:39 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-21 14:50 +0200
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-22 18:56 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2013-06-23 02:35 +0000
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-22 20:48 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-23 14:49 +0200
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-26 18:08 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-27 16:32 +0200
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-30 10:10 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-30 15:18 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-30 16:01 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-30 20:22 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-06-30 21:22 +0200
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-30 15:52 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-01 02:02 +0200
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-06-30 19:25 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-01 02:34 -0500
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-07-01 16:26 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-01 23:08 +0200
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-07-01 18:10 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-01 12:35 -1000
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-07-01 18:42 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-01 13:03 -1000
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-07-02 07:20 +0000
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2013-07-02 07:38 -1000
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-07-02 07:24 +0000
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-02 13:02 +0200
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-02 05:58 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-02 03:34 -0500
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-07-01 20:01 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-02 04:43 +0000
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-02 03:41 -0500
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-02 06:09 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-07-02 13:51 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2013-07-02 14:37 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2013-07-02 14:56 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-03 00:30 +0200
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-03 02:19 -0500
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-03 05:18 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-07-03 18:10 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-03 05:30 -0400
                Static superinstructions(was: OT (slightly) What is the "best" ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2013-07-03 14:33 +0000
                Re: Static superinstructions(was: OT (slightly) What is the "best" ...) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2013-07-04 00:41 +0200
                Re: Static superinstructions(was: OT (slightly) What is the "best" ...) "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-07 11:32 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? hughaguilar96@yahoo.com - 2013-07-03 18:31 -0700
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-07 11:28 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-07-02 16:44 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-02 05:56 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-02 05:58 -0500
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotq.cpm> - 2013-07-03 05:57 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2013-07-03 06:43 -0500
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-30 20:29 -0400
                Re: OT (slightly) What is the "best" processor for a new project? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-06-27 10:58 -0400

csiph-web