Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #16222 > unrolled thread
| Started by | gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-10-12 13:36 -0700 |
| Last post | 2012-10-18 23:38 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 158 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth
mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-12 13:36 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-12 22:49 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-13 00:06 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-13 22:34 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-13 16:46 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-14 00:24 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-14 19:09 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 01:46 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-15 04:25 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 05:35 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 16:43 -0400
The "memory wall" (was: mr paysan ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-15 09:28 +0000
Re: The "memory wall" (was: mr paysan ...) Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 03:02 -0700
Re: The "memory wall" (was: mr paysan ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-15 12:50 +0000
Re: The "memory wall" (was: mr paysan ...) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-15 14:47 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 00:10 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-18 21:53 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 01:00 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-18 22:18 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-19 09:11 +0000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-15 03:17 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 16:52 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-16 02:20 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 00:13 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 00:07 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-13 20:53 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-15 15:41 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 07:01 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-15 09:31 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-15 19:51 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 17:47 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Syd Rumpo <usenet@nononono.co.uk> - 2012-10-16 11:10 +0100
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-16 15:55 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Syd Rumpo <usenet@nononono.co.uk> - 2012-10-16 21:31 +0100
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-16 17:06 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-16 20:56 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-16 23:44 -0500
Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-10-17 10:01 +0000
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-17 21:11 -0500
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 01:08 -0700
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-18 11:42 -0500
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 15:26 -0400
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-10-18 09:25 +0000
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-18 11:46 -0500
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 15:28 -0400
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-10-18 12:44 -0700
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-18 18:49 -0500
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 20:16 -0400
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-18 17:28 -0700
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-19 03:00 +0200
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 18:00 -0400
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-10-19 11:35 +0000
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-19 10:33 -0500
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-18 18:35 +0200
Re: Transputers, was Re: mr paysan .. gavinoshit Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-18 12:06 -0500
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 13:23 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-17 11:58 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 15:22 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-17 21:53 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 16:00 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-17 23:10 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 17:28 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-18 00:11 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 15:41 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 17:27 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-15 15:28 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 19:07 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 19:09 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-16 01:21 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-15 22:26 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-15 22:35 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-16 01:50 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-15 22:54 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-16 16:00 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-17 06:40 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 13:32 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-17 21:10 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 15:45 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-19 19:45 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-16 15:58 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-17 06:32 -0400
"Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-16 11:46 +0000
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2012-10-16 16:09 +0000
Re: "Too much data" rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-16 16:04 -0400
Re: "Too much data" Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-16 11:37 -1000
Re: "Too much data" anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-17 14:00 +0000
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-10-16 13:25 -0700
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-17 14:08 +0000
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 01:31 -0700
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-18 16:42 +0000
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) Ouatu Bogdan <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 18:41 +0000
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 12:20 -0700
Re: "Too much data" Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-16 21:10 -0700
Re: "Too much data" humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 05:01 -0700
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-10-16 23:55 -0700
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-10-17 00:06 -0700
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-10-17 10:25 +0000
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-17 14:21 +0000
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-17 17:54 +0200
Re: "Too much data" (was: mr paysan where is your chip? ...) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-17 15:58 +0000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-16 01:27 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-15 08:02 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-15 11:39 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Bill Marcum <bill@nowhere.invalid> - 2012-10-21 03:31 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 17:15 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-16 10:00 +0000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 00:27 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 17:10 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 00:30 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-16 01:38 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-15 22:48 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-15 21:18 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-16 21:31 +1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-16 16:56 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-16 11:26 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-17 12:30 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-17 22:35 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-17 18:15 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-18 16:45 +0000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-19 00:31 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-18 22:34 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 01:01 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 01:06 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 02:16 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-19 19:51 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-19 18:25 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-20 16:49 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-20 22:49 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-19 22:02 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-20 17:07 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-20 14:48 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-21 02:56 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-20 22:30 -0700
Trains [Was: mr paysan where is your chip?] Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-21 04:46 -0500
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-18 19:28 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 00:33 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 01:00 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-19 11:45 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-18 18:26 +0000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-18 08:45 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-19 00:43 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-22 13:07 +1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-21 19:24 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 05:15 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2012-10-22 14:33 +0000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Spam@ControlQ.com - 2012-10-22 12:06 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2012-10-23 10:44 +0000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-22 09:29 -0500
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-22 16:30 +0200
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-16 08:52 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Ed" <invalid@nospam.com> - 2012-10-17 18:25 +1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-17 08:33 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Frank Thomason <Frank@Thomason.com> - 2012-10-17 15:31 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-10-18 12:37 -0700
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-10-18 15:57 -1000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-16 16:09 -0400
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? vandys@vsta.org - 2012-10-16 20:27 +0000
Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-10-18 23:38 -0700
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-17 23:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <2834236.2SXz5vCX8l@sunwukong.fritz.box> |
| In reply to | #16406 |
rickman wrote: > Yes, you like the ring oscillator name, but in reality this is just a > delay line matched to the delay of the ALU. Likewise the other paths > all have matched delay lines, all of which, if in use, must indicate > ready for the CPU to proceed. You even say this yourself when you > say, "These ready signals have their own delay". Yes, but the essential design are clocked flip-flops or latches, with a ring oscillator as primary driving source of the clock. That there is a "stop clock" signal to the ring oscillator is nothing special; the more special thing is that this signal is used to asynchronously delay those instructions that need it. It's not multiple delay pathes as you say, without oscillator, it's a ring oscillator plus delay pathes. > The point is that these delay lines are all different, their timings > all vary with PVT and they are all independent, not a function of any > clock. But the only delay path that is circular and feeds back to itself, resulting in the thing actually going forward is the thing I and Chuck call "ring oscillator". It doesn't matter if you don't understand a particular term. > Unless you have the design in your hands, anything else is > speculation, but of more importance, doesn't add anything to the > understanding of the CPU. That's your oppinion, that's black-box magic crap. In general, I'd like to know how the inner workings are, and in general, this *does* add considerably to the understanding. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-17 17:28 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5n7ub$mj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16409 |
On 10/17/2012 5:10 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote: > rickman wrote: >> Yes, you like the ring oscillator name, but in reality this is just a >> delay line matched to the delay of the ALU. Likewise the other paths >> all have matched delay lines, all of which, if in use, must indicate >> ready for the CPU to proceed. You even say this yourself when you >> say, "These ready signals have their own delay". > > Yes, but the essential design are clocked flip-flops or latches, with a > ring oscillator as primary driving source of the clock. That there is a > "stop clock" signal to the ring oscillator is nothing special; the more > special thing is that this signal is used to asynchronously delay those > instructions that need it. It's not multiple delay pathes as you say, > without oscillator, it's a ring oscillator plus delay pathes. This is just po.ta.toes and po.tah.toes... >> The point is that these delay lines are all different, their timings >> all vary with PVT and they are all independent, not a function of any >> clock. > > But the only delay path that is circular and feeds back to itself, > resulting in the thing actually going forward is the thing I and Chuck > call "ring oscillator". It doesn't matter if you don't understand a > particular term. I'm not much interested in opening this whole debate again. All of the delay paths close a loop, otherwise the processor would stop. The loop starts with whatever kicks off the instruction and when that instruction ends, it kicks off the timing for the next instruction. The instruction determines which delay path to utilize. For you to say the other delays cause the primary delay to "wait" is just terminology. If you have 3 instructions in a row that all use the same delay path, won't that delay path be oscillating in a ring while the ALU delay path is locked? The point is the control circuit for the CPU has multiple delays and which ever one controls the timing for the current instruction triggers the FFs and kicks off the next instruction. Naming one path the "primary" path is just terminology. >> Unless you have the design in your hands, anything else is >> speculation, but of more importance, doesn't add anything to the >> understanding of the CPU. > > That's your oppinion, that's black-box magic crap. In general, I'd like > to know how the inner workings are, and in general, this *does* add > considerably to the understanding. Really, what does it shed light on exactly? I want to know exactly what the instructions do at a register level and I want to know max and min for all the timings over PVT. Power levels are also useful. There may be a few other assorted details, but why should anyone care whether they use an AND gate or an OR gate and which delay path gets called the "ring oscillator"? Why don't we just agree to disagree on this? Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-18 00:11 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <5023468.fyqH0s9Dlp@sunwukong.fritz.box> |
| In reply to | #16410 |
rickman wrote: >> That's your oppinion, that's black-box magic crap. In general, I'd >> like to know how the inner workings are, and in general, this *does* >> add considerably to the understanding. > > Really, what does it shed light on exactly? Well, if it is a ring oscillator with additional stop/restart, there is a maximum frequency you can achieve. It can't possibly go faster than the primary cycle time, and there's also a minimum adder for start/stop delay (though that can be quite small), so everything else has to be slower. If it is just a selection of different delay chains (all inverted, so that all can loop on their own), there is no such minimum delay, nor is there a delay adder for the slower delays. The minimum delay could be important for the communications with other cores. If there wasn't such a minimum delay, and the port is already written by the next core, you could end up with a very short delay (it *is* ready), and therefore a setup violation. The ring oscillator as core and as minimum delay ensures a minimum low and a minimum high time of the clock, and therefore is a quite trivial mean to sanitize the design, with the impact that all other pathes (that are not minimal) can't be equal in speed. The difference is between "all equal" (your mental picture) and "one is always active and therefore guarantees a minimum low/high time". > I want to know exactly > what the instructions do at a register level and I want to know max > and min > for all the timings over PVT. Power levels are also useful. There > may be a few other assorted details, but why should anyone care > whether they use an AND gate or an OR gate and which delay path gets > called the "ring oscillator"? Well, it doesn't seem to matter for you, but it does matter for me. > Why don't we just agree to disagree on this? Yes, let's agree on that. So you let me call this thing ring oscillator with extra asynchronous events to stop/restart it without telling me that I'm wrong or speculating without any substance. There is some substantial research into asynchronous CPUs, and - apart from Chuck - little progress, because these designs are hard to analyze and to get right - and there are no automated tools to do this. Using one loop as dominant loop IMHO simplifies this task considerably, allowing a more conventional approach for most of the design; probably automated tools could get that right, too. You can analyze the part that's clocked by the dominating loop as a normal synchronous design, leaving only a few pathes through special function units (like SRAM or communication interface) to be checked vs. the other delay chains. -- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://bernd-paysan.de/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-18 15:41 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5pm16$f70$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16414 |
On 10/17/2012 6:11 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote: > rickman wrote: >>> That's your oppinion, that's black-box magic crap. In general, I'd >>> like to know how the inner workings are, and in general, this *does* >>> add considerably to the understanding. >> >> Really, what does it shed light on exactly? > > Well, if it is a ring oscillator with additional stop/restart, there is > a maximum frequency you can achieve. It can't possibly go faster than > the primary cycle time, and there's also a minimum adder for start/stop > delay (though that can be quite small), so everything else has to be > slower. If it is just a selection of different delay chains (all > inverted, so that all can loop on their own), there is no such minimum > delay, nor is there a delay adder for the slower delays. > > The minimum delay could be important for the communications with other > cores. If there wasn't such a minimum delay, and the port is already > written by the next core, you could end up with a very short delay (it > *is* ready), and therefore a setup violation. The ring oscillator as > core and as minimum delay ensures a minimum low and a minimum high time > of the clock, and therefore is a quite trivial mean to sanitize the > design, with the impact that all other pathes (that are not minimal) > can't be equal in speed. > > The difference is between "all equal" (your mental picture) and "one is > always active and therefore guarantees a minimum low/high time". I understand what you are saying, but having one delay be the shortest to assure some timing to the outside world (which I don't get since they are all async) still does not require it to be called a ring oscillator. >> I want to know exactly >> what the instructions do at a register level and I want to know max >> and min >> for all the timings over PVT. Power levels are also useful. There >> may be a few other assorted details, but why should anyone care >> whether they use an AND gate or an OR gate and which delay path gets >> called the "ring oscillator"? > > Well, it doesn't seem to matter for you, but it does matter for me. But you still have not explained how it makes a difference. That's all I'm asking. This is a complication to the idea of the async processor with multiple timing paths matching multiple calculation paths. How does it make a difference to you in using the chip? >> Why don't we just agree to disagree on this? > > Yes, let's agree on that. So you let me call this thing ring oscillator > with extra asynchronous events to stop/restart it without telling me > that I'm wrong or speculating without any substance. You can call it what you want and I won't correct you... out loud... ;^) > There is some substantial research into asynchronous CPUs, and - apart > from Chuck - little progress, because these designs are hard to analyze > and to get right - and there are no automated tools to do this. Using > one loop as dominant loop IMHO simplifies this task considerably, > allowing a more conventional approach for most of the design; probably > automated tools could get that right, too. You can analyze the part > that's clocked by the dominating loop as a normal synchronous design, > leaving only a few pathes through special function units (like SRAM or > communication interface) to be checked vs. the other delay chains. Tools can't be automated until clear rules are understood. Are the rules understood? If you can check logic path A against delay path A', why wouldn't it be the same process to check logic path B against delay path B'? I like the GA144 for a number of reasons. But I don't consider this design to be much in the way of "progress". It seems to have failed entirely in terms of connecting to the rest of the outside world which is essential to such a progressive design. It has even failed in a reasonable attempt to connect to modern memories! You seem to focus on the design process for the CPU. I guess that is understandable since that is your "thing". I would like to see this chip done in a way that lets it integrate with the rest of the world. Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-15 17:27 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5hv3c$ngh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16298 |
On 10/15/2012 12:31 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > Mark Wills<forthfreak@gmail.com> writes: >> Perhaps it's considered too difficult to write code that operates on a >> stack (where access to data is constrained by the order in which it is >> on the stack) as opposed to code that accesses data via registers >> (essentially random access). > > Stack processors including Chuck's have added registers to deal with the > insufficiency of pure stacks for implementing useful code. Without the > registers you end up having to use memory to hold temporary or other > very frequently accessed values. In the F18's case, a memory access > burns several instruction slots (because the memory address is in the > program stream) plus the access itself is several times slower than a > stack or register operation. When the address is in A or B, the F18A memory access is more than three times as slow as CPU instructions (max 5.7 ns vs max 1.65 ns) because they are memory accesses. If the memory address is indirect through P, then it adds another memory cycle (now six times slower than a CPU cycle) plus the time for delaying the instruction prefetch which depends on the slot occupied by the instruction. >> Personally, I don't find it particularly difficult, and I'm sure I'd >> take to writing 'Forth assembly' like a duck to water. > > The usefulness of local variables in practical Forth shows that there's > occasionally too much live data to do everything on the stack. In > interpreted Forths where the stack itself is also in memory, or in > compiled Forths where stack and local accesses end up using registers, > this works out ok. In stack hardware where locals and memory are 10x(?) > slower than stack accesses, overall program performance probably > suffers. Are local variables "useful" or just convenient? I don't agree that there is "too much live data" for the stack, at least very seldom. It has been put to me that this indicates poor factoring. But I guess I shouldn't open the factoring can of worms. Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-15 15:28 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <7x626bl68p.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #16311 |
rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
> When the address is in A or B, the F18A memory access is more than
> three times as slow as CPU instructions (max 5.7 ns vs max 1.65 ns)
> because they are memory accesses. If the memory address is indirect
> through P, then it adds another memory cycle (now six times slower
> than a CPU cycle) plus the time for delaying the instruction prefetch
> which depends on the slot occupied by the instruction.
Don't forget that even in the direct case, there are two or three memory
accesses. E.g. adding register A to the TOS is "@a +" (two instruction
slots), but adding variable X to the TOS ("X +") gets the address of X
from the bits of the remaining instruction slots in the current word (if
possible--potentially it has to read the -next- word to get the address
of X), then it has to read the contents of X, and finally it has to
fetch the following word before it can continue with the instruction
stream.
I remember finding it incredibly frustrating to not have a way (unless I
missed it) to load small constants like 1 without burning several words.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-15 19:07 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5i4vr$qhl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16317 |
On 10/15/2012 6:28 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> rickman<gnuarm@gmail.com> writes:
>> When the address is in A or B, the F18A memory access is more than
>> three times as slow as CPU instructions (max 5.7 ns vs max 1.65 ns)
>> because they are memory accesses. If the memory address is indirect
>> through P, then it adds another memory cycle (now six times slower
>> than a CPU cycle) plus the time for delaying the instruction prefetch
>> which depends on the slot occupied by the instruction.
>
>
> Don't forget that even in the direct case, there are two or three memory
> accesses. E.g. adding register A to the TOS is "@a +" (two instruction
> slots), but adding variable X to the TOS ("X +") gets the address of X
> from the bits of the remaining instruction slots in the current word (if
> possible--potentially it has to read the -next- word to get the address
> of X), then it has to read the contents of X, and finally it has to
> fetch the following word before it can continue with the instruction
> stream.
The remaining bits of an instruction word can be used for immediate
data, but are NEVER used for an address I'm pretty sure. The opcode
used is @p, indirect P with autoincrement which fetches the next word
from instruction memory and increments the program counter. This is
followed by a! or b! and then @ or @b respectively. So it would be
@p a! @a and an address in the next word to read the value in memory
with an immediate addressing mode. It's been a couple of months since
I've looked at the GA144 so correct me if I am wrong on this.
> I remember finding it incredibly frustrating to not have a way (unless I
> missed it) to load small constants like 1 without burning several words.
I know, but try designing a MISC sometime. There are tons of tradeoffs
and Chuck picked ones that often end up with multiple instructions.
Read his pages, he has some shortcuts that aren't so bad. Zero is just
DUP OR if the stack is empty or DUP DUP OR if it isn't. Minus 1 is "get
a zero" and -. There are some that aren't about constants. Subtract is
quicker if you subtract S from T instead of the conventional T from S...
- . + - rather than push - pop . + -
The idea is that the ALU opcodes run really fast, so you can afford to
run a few off to do basic things that you aren't doing every six
instructions. I get that. But there are other issues I have trouble
with, like not having complete timing info.
Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-15 19:09 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5i53c$qhl$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16319 |
On 10/15/2012 7:07 PM, rickman wrote: > On 10/15/2012 6:28 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > >> I remember finding it incredibly frustrating to not have a way (unless I >> missed it) to load small constants like 1 without burning several words. > > I know, but try designing a MISC sometime. There are tons of tradeoffs > and Chuck picked ones that often end up with multiple instructions. Read > his pages, he has some shortcuts that aren't so bad. Zero is just DUP OR > if the stack is empty or DUP DUP OR if it isn't. Minus 1 is "get a zero" > and -. There are some that aren't about constants. Subtract is quicker > if you subtract S from T instead of the conventional T from S... - . + - > rather than push - pop . + - > > The idea is that the ALU opcodes run really fast, so you can afford to > run a few off to do basic things that you aren't doing every six > instructions. I get that. But there are other issues I have trouble > with, like not having complete timing info. > > Rick Opps, I forgot the link. Lots of useful info on this page. Like much of his stuff, you really need to read it multiple times to get all the juice from the grapes. http://www.colorforth.com/inst.htm Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-16 01:21 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5iqmh$nc1$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #16319 |
"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:k5i4vr$qhl$1@dont-email.me... > On 10/15/2012 6:28 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: ... > > I remember finding it incredibly frustrating to not have a way (unless I > > missed it) to load small constants like 1 without burning several words. > > I know, but try designing a MISC sometime. There are tons of tradeoffs > and Chuck picked ones that often end up with multiple instructions. > Read his pages, he has some shortcuts that aren't so bad. Zero is just > DUP OR if the stack is empty or DUP DUP OR if it isn't. Minus 1 is "get > a zero" and -. There are some that aren't about constants. Subtract is > quicker if you subtract S from T instead of the conventional T from S... > - . + - rather than push - pop . + - > Instead of "DUP OR", I think you meant "DUP XOR". So, must you do a stack size check to determine which sequence to use? "stack_size" 0<> IF DUP THEN DUP XOR That's obtuse. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-15 22:26 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <7xtxtvgf6z.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #16323 |
"Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> writes: > Instead of "DUP OR", I think you meant "DUP XOR". DUP OR is correct. OR on the F18 is an exclusive or. If you have a concern about that, then as they say on the Charles Schwab commercials, "talk to Chuck". > So, must you do a stack size check to determine which sequence to use? No. The F18 has circular stacks that don't underflow.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-15 22:35 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <7xpq4jgeso.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #16325 |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes: >> So, must you do a stack size check to determine which sequence to use? > No. The F18 has circular stacks that don't underflow. Or to answer more relevantly, I should have said, the idea is that you normally would know statically what stuff is on the stack (specifically about whether.you are willing to trash the top element).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-16 01:50 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5isbp$qet$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #16325 |
"Paul Rubin" <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:7xtxtvgf6z.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com... > "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> writes: ... > > Instead of "DUP OR", I think you meant "DUP XOR". > > DUP OR is correct. OR on the F18 is an exclusive or. Does it have an inclusive-or? If so (expected), what's it named? "IOR"? FYI, one should probably clarify if an "OR" instruction is actually an exclusive-or, and isn't actually an inclusive-or, as would be expected by most. Otherwise, it requires familiarity with instruction set of the processor in question. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-15 22:54 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <7x391fvu4y.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| In reply to | #16328 |
"Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> writes: > Does it have an inclusive-or? Nope. You could look yourself, http://www.colorforth.com/inst.htm . > Otherwise, it requires familiarity with instruction set of the > processor in question. Yes. It's the F18 machine language, and machine language programming usually requires familiarity with the processor's instruction set.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-16 16:00 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5ked3$6ue$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16328 |
On 10/16/2012 1:50 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > "Paul Rubin"<no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote in message > news:7xtxtvgf6z.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com... >> "Rod Pemberton"<do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> writes: > .... > >>> Instead of "DUP OR", I think you meant "DUP XOR". >> >> DUP OR is correct. OR on the F18 is an exclusive or. > > Does it have an inclusive-or? If so (expected), what's it named? "IOR"? > > FYI, one should probably clarify if an "OR" instruction is actually an > exclusive-or, and isn't actually an inclusive-or, as would be expected by > most. Otherwise, it requires familiarity with instruction set of the > processor in question. Programming in assembly language requires familiarity with the instruction set of the processor... DUH! Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-17 06:40 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5m1mu$a5a$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #16356 |
"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:k5ked3$6ue$2@dont-email.me... > On 10/16/2012 1:50 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > "Paul Rubin"<no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote in message > > news:7xtxtvgf6z.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com... > >> "Rod Pemberton"<do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> writes: > > .... > > > >>> Instead of "DUP OR", I think you meant "DUP XOR". > >> > >> DUP OR is correct. OR on the F18 is an exclusive or. > > > > Does it have an inclusive-or? If so (expected), what's it named? > > "IOR"? > > > > FYI, one should probably clarify if an "OR" instruction is actually an > > exclusive-or, and isn't actually an inclusive-or, as would be expected > > by most. Otherwise, it requires familiarity with instruction set of the > > processor in question. > > Programming in assembly language requires familiarity with the > instruction set of the processor... DUH! > Paul may be programming the F18 (or you may be programming the GA144), but I'm certainly not, nor are most others here. Most here are probably not familiar with those instruction sets, nor care to ever be. So, if Paul knows his statements are going to lead to an erroneous understanding, he could've premptively prevented it by noting that it's not what one typically expects. From his few recent posts, I'd say he is thoroughly familiar with enough microprocessors and programming languages that he knows "OR" normally means inclusive-or in most programming contexts. Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-17 13:32 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5mq4c$336$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16383 |
On 10/17/2012 6:40 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > "rickman"<gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:k5ked3$6ue$2@dont-email.me... >> On 10/16/2012 1:50 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: >>> "Paul Rubin"<no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote in message >>> news:7xtxtvgf6z.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com... >>>> "Rod Pemberton"<do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> writes: >>> .... >>> >>>>> Instead of "DUP OR", I think you meant "DUP XOR". >>>> >>>> DUP OR is correct. OR on the F18 is an exclusive or. >>> >>> Does it have an inclusive-or? If so (expected), what's it named? >>> "IOR"? >>> >>> FYI, one should probably clarify if an "OR" instruction is actually an >>> exclusive-or, and isn't actually an inclusive-or, as would be expected >>> by most. Otherwise, it requires familiarity with instruction set of the >>> processor in question. >> >> Programming in assembly language requires familiarity with the >> instruction set of the processor... DUH! >> > > Paul may be programming the F18 (or you may be programming the GA144), but > I'm certainly not, nor are most others here. Most here are probably not > familiar with those instruction sets, nor care to ever be. So, if Paul > knows his statements are going to lead to an erroneous understanding, he > could've premptively prevented it by noting that it's not what one typically > expects. From his few recent posts, I'd say he is thoroughly familiar with > enough microprocessors and programming languages that he knows "OR" normally > means inclusive-or in most programming contexts. > > > Rod Pemberton I would suggest that by now, you should know that there is little about the F18A or the GA144 that is like anything you have worked with before. Don't assume... Also, I made the post that you misunderstood. I did think for a moment about the code being misunderstood and wasn't sure who did and didn't know about the opcodes of the F18A. Now I know. I also realized it would stick in the minds of the readers much better if it just this sort of discussion resulted. There many ways to make a point and I think this one has been rooted in your mind pretty well, no? "mission accomplished" Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-17 21:10 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5nknj$a48$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #16396 |
"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:k5mq4c$336$1@dont-email.me... ... > There many ways to make a point and I think > this one has been rooted in your mind pretty well, no? > > "mission accomplished" > > Rick You're Rick as in Rick Hohensee, yes? Silly me, I didn't catch the "rickman" monicker. Shouldn't you be troll..., er, I'm mean touting your software, such as the osimplay assembler, H3sm 3-stack Forth, H3rL 3-ring Linux, Ha3sm 3-stack Forth based OS, or Forreal 32-bit RM x86 code? RP
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-18 15:45 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5pm8b$goo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16417 |
On 10/17/2012 9:10 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > "rickman"<gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:k5mq4c$336$1@dont-email.me... > .... > >> There many ways to make a point and I think >> this one has been rooted in your mind pretty well, no? >> >> "mission accomplished" >> >> Rick > > You're Rick as in Rick Hohensee, yes? > > Silly me, I didn't catch the "rickman" monicker. > > Shouldn't you be troll..., er, I'm mean touting your software, such as the > osimplay assembler, H3sm 3-stack Forth, H3rL 3-ring Linux, Ha3sm > 3-stack Forth based OS, or Forreal 32-bit RM x86 code? > > > RP No, I'm the *other* troll... I mean engineer. I do hardware more than software. That is why I view the GA144 as a processor based FPGA. But even in that view it is rather lacking as some have tried to point out. Some days I am more enthusiastic about the part than others. Today is not one of those days. Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-19 19:45 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5sofr$77u$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #16458 |
"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message news:k5pm8b$goo$1@dont-email.me... > On 10/17/2012 9:10 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > > "rickman"<gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:k5mq4c$336$1@dont-email.me... > > .... > > > >> There many ways to make a point and I think > >> this one has been rooted in your mind pretty well, no? > >> > >> "mission accomplished" > >> > >> Rick > > > > You're Rick as in Rick Hohensee, yes? > > > > Silly me, I didn't catch the "rickman" monicker. > > > > Shouldn't you be troll..., er, I'm mean touting your software, such as > > the osimplay assembler, H3sm 3-stack Forth, H3rL 3-ring Linux, > > Ha3sm 3-stack Forth based OS, or Forreal 32-bit RM x86 code? > > > > No, I'm the *other* troll... I mean engineer. I do hardware more than > software. That is why I view the GA144 as a processor based FPGA. But > even in that view it is rather lacking as some have tried to point out. > Some days I am more enthusiastic about the part than others. Today is > not one of those days. > What no comment about assumptions Mr. Collins? See what not providing proper context does ... Rod Pemberton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-10-16 15:58 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: mr paysan where is your chip? where is the personal computer pwoered by paysan cpu? that runs firefox and is liek 10x faster than amd? |
| Message-ID | <k5kea4$6ue$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #16323 |
On 10/16/2012 1:21 AM, Rod Pemberton wrote: > "rickman"<gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:k5i4vr$qhl$1@dont-email.me... >> On 10/15/2012 6:28 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > .... > >>> I remember finding it incredibly frustrating to not have a way (unless I >>> missed it) to load small constants like 1 without burning several words. >> >> I know, but try designing a MISC sometime. There are tons of tradeoffs >> and Chuck picked ones that often end up with multiple instructions. >> Read his pages, he has some shortcuts that aren't so bad. Zero is just >> DUP OR if the stack is empty or DUP DUP OR if it isn't. Minus 1 is "get >> a zero" and -. There are some that aren't about constants. Subtract is >> quicker if you subtract S from T instead of the conventional T from S... >> - . + - rather than push - pop . + - >> > > Instead of "DUP OR", I think you meant "DUP XOR". You are not conversant with the GA144 assembly language. The OR instruction *is* an "xor". > So, must you do a stack size check to determine which sequence to use? > > "stack_size" 0<> IF DUP THEN DUP XOR > > That's obtuse. If your code has to check the size of the stack to know if the stack is empty you aren't can't handle programming the GA144. You've got bloody 64 words of combined instruction and data space. Figure it out! No, you just aren't allowed to post anything about the GA144 at this point. I'm revoking your privileges! Rick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth
csiph-web