| ??? 12/06/06 13:21 Modified: 12/06/06 13:32 Read: times |
#129071 - My bad. Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Just a small and irrelevant remark: Z80 did have blockmoves (LDIR/LDDR), and one would certainly not call it a DSP... :-) <p>
Ah, my bad (I'm still somewhat sad about not getting into assembly programming in the 80's ... when I was still young and things would have been even easier to learn. So I've never done anything in Z80 or 65xx assembly. I've had a project where the "old version" was completely in 68k assembly though, and had to work through it.). However, I was not really referring to standard blockmoves (many architectures have those), but to explicit "delay" commands (copy a[i] to a[i+1]) that for example TI C54x DSPs have - even to the point where the delay is actually part of a single-cycle MAC instruction and thus does not create any overhead. But then again, this architecture also has hardware support for circular buffers, which is really neat. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| shifting array elements using bitwise opeartor inC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Elaborate please. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| opeartor inC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Possibly not | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Possibly not | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No, it doesn't | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| *nitpick* | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Ah yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| may be not! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| We will never know ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| my actual problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| do not shift at all | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Circular buffer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| it's bytewise then, isn't it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| That makes _a lot_ more sense. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| just a small remark | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
My bad. | 01/01/70 00:00 |



