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>
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

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 ;-)