Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #162100
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.folklore.computers |
| Subject | Re: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] |
| Date | 2016-04-05 03:05 +0000 |
| Organization | NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95 |
| Message-ID | <ndva17115nk@news6.newsguy.com> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <ndle1l$2s2$2@dont-email.me> <ndllam$utu$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ndmq68$jmo$1@dont-email.me> <20160401212231.1c439bc6@_> <ndupd5$5d1$1@dont-email.me> |
On 2016-04-04, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote: > "Rod Pemberton" <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> wrote in message > news:20160401212231.1c439bc6@_... > >> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...] >> >> Z80 - binary compatible with 8080 > > The Z80 is *not* strictly "binary compatible" with the 8080. There is some > slight difference in the way the parity flag is used in some compare > instructions, and also some incompatibility with the half-carry flag. I remember reading about programs that would figure out which processor they were running on... > Everywhere I look on the 'net, it seems people are trying to plow this > knowledge under and ignore it. "The worst thing about getting older is watching knowledge die." -- me -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-04-01 21:22 -0400
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] Rod Pemberton <NoHaveNotOne@bcczxcfre.cmm> - 2016-04-01 21:26 -0400
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-04-02 08:46 +0000
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor Bogus@Embarq.com (Steve) - 2016-04-03 12:31 +0000
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-04-03 14:44 +0200
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-04-03 18:53 +0000
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor Bogus@Embarq.com (Steve) - 2016-04-03 20:07 +0000
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-04-03 21:18 +0000
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 20:20 -0400
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 20:17 -0400
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-04-04 15:53 +0000
Re: OT: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] roger.ivie@gmail.com - 2016-04-02 09:48 -0700
Re: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-04-04 17:24 -0500
Re: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-04-04 23:08 +0000
Re: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-04-05 03:05 +0000
Re: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] Bogus@Embarq.com (Steve) - 2016-04-05 17:43 +0000
Re: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-04-05 19:15 +0100
Re: processor binary- or pin-compatibility, was [Re: Processor ISAs] "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-04-17 02:37 -0500
csiph-web