Re: [f-cpu] Do we really need virtual memory?

[ben franchuk <bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca>]

Yann Guidon wrote:
> ben franchuk wrote:
>
>
> > I think the trick for getting the F-cpu out the door is rather
> > not dropping features but find out reasonable subsets of the 
> > instruction set to build up the design from.  Something like you 
> > bootstrap a compiler. For example can one get by with say 16 registers 
> > , a simple incriment unit and alu unit and mmu? 
>
>
> what you describe it IS dropping features, and modifying the f-cpu 
> definition.
While I am reducing features, the features are a subset of the compleate
F-cpu design. However since this is still a prototype design, you don't 
have as large steps to test and debug, compared to the 'full feature'
design.


> the big issue with F-CPU is that we must do the right thing at the first 
> time,
> or not at all, otherwise people will stick to the wrong version etc.
> In the end, the time lost in making things right is probably the same as
> the time lost in guiding people back to the "right way".
No argument there.

> YG
Ben.
PS. I seem to get some spam that seems to come from the f-cpu list.
Anybody else have that problem?

*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu       in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/