3 ms·
I answered a similar question by anyfoo downthread, the point about implementing a PIT should explain what I mean, and why I think that emulating a simple real
by saithound 2y ago
I answered a similar question by anyfoo downthread, the point about implementing a PIT should explain what I mean, and why I think that emulating a simple real architecture might be more useful while requiring similar effort.
- c0wb0yc0d3r 2y agoLink in case the order changes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42519788 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42519788
- anyfoo 2y agoAgain, you are coming at this from a software engineering direction, not a computer architecture/engineering one.
- saithound 2y agoSince I have the exact same thought (that you are coming at this from a software engineering direction, not a computer architecture/engineering one), this is unlikely to be further productive :( You say you want students to be able to write emulators/simulators etc. (you list a bunch of software.engineering tasks). I say writing an LC-3 emulator won't give you any transferable skills for writing, say, a Gameboy Emulator (still a 30yo system), because these educational arhitectures are bad and abstract away precisely the things that you have to get right to do that, leaving you with something trivial to implement: a C array for "memory" and a few bitwise operations. Since we're largely looking at the same things and coming to orthogonal conclusions, I suggest we agree to disagree on this one.
- liontwist 2y agoThis article would directly apply to NES or game boy emulation. Yes, there are fewer instructions.