TI MSP430
in [Embedded]
|
From: Jim Stewart on 9 Apr 2006 12:00 larwe wrote: > Marc Ramsey wrote: > > >>>MSP430 is a truly elegant architecture, there's no denying it. von >> >>Of course, the architecture is a simplified version of the TMS9900 CPU, >>which was derived from the TI 990 minicomputer, which was in turn a >>rip-off of the PDP-11 ISA, with slight changes (fewer addressing modes, > > > LOL. You know, writing this most recent book is so amusing. I think I > could probably use 75% of it as responses in c.a.e. > > "Now, it's an obscure but well-recognized ritual amongst engineers and > computer scientists to gauge the architecture of any new device on the > basis of its similarity to the PDP-11(1). The strongest term of > approbation you can use for a CPU design is to say "It's just like a > PDP-11!". Exactly why this is universally regarded as a Good Thing is > not exactly clear, but in any case, this epithet is frequently applied > to the MSP430. (I've always felt that this is the same sort of > statement as saying "My 2007 Mercedes convertible is just like a 1965 > International Harvester Scout light truck. They both have pneumatic > tires and a removable roof!"). What I think these people probably > mean is that the MSP430 has a very nice orthogonal instruction set and > simple memory addressing scheme. Funny. When I looked at a PIC, my first reaction was that "it was just like a PDP-8".
From: Jim Stewart on 9 Apr 2006 12:02 Gary Reichlinger wrote: > On 8 Apr 2006 17:43:20 -0700, "larwe" <zwsdotcom(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>"Now, it's an obscure but well-recognized ritual amongst engineers and >>computer scientists to gauge the architecture of any new device on the >>basis of its similarity to the PDP-11(1). > > > Do you guys belong to AARP? Personally, no. But I could join if I wanted. (:
From: CBFalconer on 9 Apr 2006 11:33 Jonathan Kirwan wrote: > CBFalconer <cbfalconer(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> larwe wrote: >>> Gary Reichlinger wrote: >>> >>>>> basis of its similarity to the PDP-11(1). >>>> >>>> Do you guys belong to AARP? >>> >>> Not yet, but the curmudgeonliness flux density is high in the >>> engineering field, so it's forgivable that you would ask the >>> question :) >> >> What we really need is a PDP-8 on a chip. > > Actually, Lewin appears to be working on something older. I think > his ulterior motive, though, is to give those "curmudgeons" here > something to go waste their time on so that his competition > dwindles away and he's in a better position towards his goal of > world domination. ;) > > P.S. Although I worked on PDP-8s, recall the 14" drive patters, > the DecTapes, and kicking an 8k drum memory to get it working > again, I don't really like the instruction set that much today. > Still have my pdp-8 manuals around, though. And the little nifty > instruction card. I first encountered one before getting into computers at all, when on a visit to Berkeley circa 1963 I found an old acquaintance (forget his name, but a physicist from AECL, Chalk River) had acquired one. It was a marvel of compactness - occupied only one relay rack, together with the free standing ASR33. Didn't even require conditioned power lines, IIRC. -- "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> Also see <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>
From: Tauno Voipio on 9 Apr 2006 14:19 CBFalconer wrote: > larwe wrote: > >>Gary Reichlinger wrote: >> >> >>>>basis of its similarity to the PDP-11(1). >>> >>> Do you guys belong to AARP? >> >>Not yet, but the curmudgeonliness flux density is high in the >>engineering field, so it's forgivable that you would ask the >>question :) > > > What we really need is a PDP-8 on a chip. Rather not - but some PIC's are pretty close with all the built-in limitations of a PDP-8. My vote to PDP-11. Been there - used both, a couple of years ago. -- Tauno Voipio tauno voipio (at) iki fi
From: Everett M. Greene on 9 Apr 2006 08:20
Gary Reichlinger <reichln(a)navix.net> writes: > On 8 Apr 2006 17:43:20 -0700, "larwe" <zwsdotcom(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >"Now, it's an obscure but well-recognized ritual amongst engineers and > >computer scientists to gauge the architecture of any new device on the > >basis of its similarity to the PDP-11(1). > > Do you guys belong to AARP? Watch your mouth there, you young whippersnapper! We do not mention the "O" word in polite company. |