A stupid post about Intel's latest computer chip ( s)

It's a common mistake of some IT-geeks that once they understood something new, they think it's the best idea since sliced bread.

Sorry, but can you please place your FUps to the place they belong? Why do you FUp to an article some rounds below that article you're commenting? This is plainly idiotic.

Of course, but I think that's not the way to solve this problem. The better way would be to use more robust languages instad of this silly C.

Oliver S. wrote: > It's a common mistake of some IT-geeks that once they understood > something new, they think it's the best idea since sliced bread.

Sliced bread stales too fast. I leave my loaves whole and slice as needed. Thick slices for toast and thin for sandwiches. What's this one-size-fits-all nonsense? So what?

Jerry

I've got the data book here (I never throw anything away!) and a machine cycle is 8 clock ticks [*]. You may be thinking of the 8051.

Andrew.

In article , Andrew Haley wrote: [...]

Yes, I suspect so.

That could be why I though 8 was quick.

A few weeks back, I went looking for some of my source code on the 1802. I couldn't find it. I do remember that the 64bit/32bit->32bit divide took, near enough, forever.

Definitely a compiler. Of course, Forths have always done a sort of compilation, the executable form of a definition in the classical model was a sequence of "compiled" absolute addresses processed by an address interpreter which on some platforms was slightly faster than a CALL instruction. However, for the last 10 years or so Forths have been compiling pretty good optimized machine code.

I have never really been comfortable with the term "interpreter" used to describe Forth, since its internal form has never been what the conventional sense of that word implies.

Cheers, Elizabeth

ICT, the Integer Cosine Transform, was specifically designed to minimize the 1 bits in the coefficients for a processor without multiply such as the CDP1802.

The reference is somewhere in jpl.gov.

-- glen