DamageX Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 If you want to know about 74xxx parts check www.chipdir.org or get a TTL Data Book Am I the only one who sees the irony of a link being posted here to a Rick Balkins thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNIXcoffee928 Posted May 1, 2006 Author Share Posted May 1, 2006 (edited) Due to lack of interest this post has been removed. Edited May 4, 2006 by UNIXcoffee928 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danwinslow Posted May 1, 2006 Share Posted May 1, 2006 My Irony Sensor performed a panic shutdown several posts back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNIXcoffee928 Posted May 1, 2006 Author Share Posted May 1, 2006 Whatever. -UNIXcoffee928 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mos6507 Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 Terbium discussions go back at least two years. This I wouldn't call "ages" either, but surely you're right that it is a bit earlier than I thought. I am pretty sure though that there was no information about 65T32 on the WDC page two years ago (or even a year ago - but about this I am not so sure). Let me know when they start offering a physical part. It just seems like it's taking too long and I think I know why. The 65816 was a novel solution to turning the 6502 into a 16-bit machine. Going to 32-bit while maintaining any sort of meaningful backwards compatibility is a big challenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drac030 Posted May 2, 2006 Share Posted May 2, 2006 (edited) Looking at the 65C816 as a 16-bit extension to 6502, it is rather hard to anticipate WDC's 32-bit extension to the 65C816. But I tend to think that the main difficulty may be the 16-bit data bus, and not the software backward compatibility. At least, there's quite a bit of spare opcodes to be used with new 32-bit addressing modes (I mean the reserved range of $0280-$02FF), and yet the WDM instruction, which may be used as a prefix, so the operation of the opcodes existing so far does not have to be modified or affected by the 32-bit extension. Edited May 2, 2006 by drac030 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danwinslow Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 What, no status? I was looking forward to the 'parallel workflow diagram'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+warerat Posted May 4, 2006 Share Posted May 4, 2006 (edited) Post deleted. Edited May 4, 2006 by warerat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNIXcoffee928 Posted May 4, 2006 Author Share Posted May 4, 2006 Whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ApolloBoy Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 What's going on here? I'm seeing a lot of removed posts, and it's bugging me since I'd like to see an 8-bit use a 32-bit CPU... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.