Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.forth > #54991

Re: How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish?

Path csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.lang.forth
Subject Re: How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish?
Date Sat, 18 Feb 2017 19:50:23 -0800
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Lines 11
Message-ID <87fujan8jk.fsf@nightsong.com> (permalink)
References <868fa053-875a-4c87-92fd-edb924ca7efd@googlegroups.com> <87o9xzm4e7.fsf@nightsong.com> <1cfdac60-4f4b-4769-93d7-386275fd672b@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain
Injection-Info mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="438961605d72ac5d3c11ac134f5a0e06"; logging-data="8232"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+oAJwlDKezCbU/3fpXEjrl"
User-Agent Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock sha1:rcDtFnOf3c0keYvC43SYpNpZnGs= sha1:n0vLLR2/Zc5EBUDRG/FafPwX/ac=
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.forth:54991

Show key headers only | View raw


jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> writes:
> majority of code would have quite a lot of 1 to 1 machine code mapping.

You mean you want to run 68000 binaries on the new cpu after some
machine translation?  It's not impossible, binary translators are
written all the time, but if you want a 32-bit m68k why not use one?
Don't they still make them?

> The boot strap of a whole OS would be comparatively simple.

I doubt this ;-)

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


Thread

How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 13:44 -0800
  Re: How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-18 16:05 -0800
    Re: How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 16:15 -0800
      Re: How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-18 19:50 -0800
        Re: How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 20:17 -0800
  Re: How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2017-02-18 17:41 -0800
    Re: How easy to port to this 68000 variant-ish? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 19:29 -0800

csiph-web