Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Remember the iAPX 432?Remember the iAPX 432?Posted Jan 18, 2007 16:26 UTC (Thu) by AJWM (guest, #15888)In reply to: Remember the iAPX 432? by drag Parent article: LCA: Andrew Tanenbaum on creating reliable systems
Kind of.
The iAPX 432 was (as I recall) designed to be an Ada machine in the same way that e.g. the Burroughs B6700 et al were designed to be Algol machines (or Algol & Cobol machines). (Actually I think the 432 started out as a more generic HLL machine but when DOD finalized on Ada, Intel made the obvious moves to accomodate.)
(Log in to post comments)
Remember the iAPX 432? Posted Jan 20, 2007 0:43 UTC (Sat) by brouhaha (subscriber, #1698) [Link] That's correct. Ada was only in a very early stage of development when the 432 project started (originally as the 8800), and was not the target at that time. The first language to ship for the 432 was actually a dialect of Smalltalk.
The 432 architecture was very similar in concept, if not in detail, to the JVM.
Remember the iAPX 432? Posted Jan 20, 2007 11:03 UTC (Sat) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Well you have the 'Open Graphics' project recently got their first prototype board. It's all re-programmable and all that.
They have pictures and specifications at:
Also HP has their new innovations with their FPGA designs were it allows faster speeds and much less waste of die space compared to older FPGA technology...
And you have Sun GPL'ng their cpu design, which is interesting (if currently a bit pointless).
And now you have Sun with their open source JVM.
Now I am a bit ignorant, and I know that there is a huge difference between programming for C vs programming a FPGA or whatnot, but what is the posibility for using a programmable proccessor for running, or at least accelerating, a Java Virtual Machine?
Or maybe a simplified Lisp environment?
Would it be worth it for a certain group of people to have hardware specificly tailored for a paticular software programming language?
|
|||||||||||||