Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis
From: Timothy Little (tim-via-n.i.net_at_little-possums.net)
Date: 01/22/05
- Next message: Timothy Little: "Re: similar to godel numbering"
- Previous message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis"
- In reply to: David Kastrup: "Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis"
- Next in thread: David Kastrup: "Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis"
- Reply: David Kastrup: "Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 22 Jan 2005 08:50:45 GMT
David Kastrup wrote:
> Unlikely. The age of the 6809 is not the age of 4kB RAMs.
The 6809 was used in a number of computers with RAM sizes similar to
4kB, as well as a number of embedded systems with even less.
I'm not certain what the RAM size was on the TRS-80 CoCo, but I'm
moderately confident it was 4kB originally, and that was based on a
version of the 6809 (MC6809E from my foggy recollection, it was the
second CPU for which I learned the machine language).
> The 6809 is a _newer_ CPU than the 68000, even with some fancier
> addressing modes (like indirect addressing).
The 6809 was a CPU with an 8-bit data bus. It was certainly not newer
than the internally 32-bit 68000, although I hear versions of the 6809
they are still being used in embedded systems. Maybe you're thinking
of the 680x0 series? I don't think a 68090 ever existed though.
- Tim
- Next message: Timothy Little: "Re: similar to godel numbering"
- Previous message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis"
- In reply to: David Kastrup: "Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis"
- Next in thread: David Kastrup: "Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis"
- Reply: David Kastrup: "Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]