[GTALUG] reverse engineering

[James Knott]

On 03/30/2019 01:16 PM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote:
> If you already have 4-bit or 8-bit software which already does most of
> the job, or if you have engineers who already have deep skills only
> with those old processors, that might justify using old cores.
>
> As a programmer who has dealt with 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, and 64-bit
> processors, I can tell you that each step helped.  The only negative
> of the larger systems is that they invited software bloat, and that
> bloat really could be a drag on productivity.  OK, there is also
> hardware bloat: there usually were more complex mechanisms to
> actually get to the pins.


When you're cranking out millions of chips, real estate is a significant
factor.  With custom chips, the number of CPU pins is independent of how
many leads leave the package.  The chip is just a black box, with
whatever CPU in it.  There are still things for which 4 bits is sufficient.

> Some of us cut our teeth programming on these things.  Usually in
> assembly language.  Many of us fall in love with the first system we
> deeply understood.  So there is a generation of defenders of the z80
> (and the 6502).  This is nostalgia: they are indefensible for new
> designs.

My first CPU was the 8080, in my IMSAI 8080.  I used to code directly
into octal, on square ruled paper.  ;)
I then moved my coding skills to Data General Nova 800, followed by 6502
& 6809, the latter two for courses at Ryerson, the Nova at work.