On 2/4/2010 4:38 AM, Rainer Buchty wrote: > - The PDF says: "I/Os are not 5V tolerant". I see a lot of resistors > to handle this. But is it still capable of driving the C64 plus some > extras? If not, what is needed to make it capable? For example, will > 74HCT245's and 541's do? > > You don't need extra level shifters as GODIL comes readily equipped > with such. These you can use (adds 700ps to the timing path), but you > don't need to in case you don't require 5V tolerance. GODIL's use of 74CB3T16211 level shifters was good information. I'd been looking at the 5V I/O tolerance issue and the fact that series resistors were problematic. > > Btw., if there are special feature requests or ideas for improvement > regarding future versions of GODIL, let me know and I'll happily > forward it to Mike Randelzhofer, the developer of GODIL (whom I'd like > to thank for donating me first-batch sample). It seems like a smaller version for final use might be worth the trouble. The current product looks like a swiss army knife, with USB, header pins, etc., but if one of the goals is to replace a 40/48 pin DIP IC, that item might not fit in some situations. For what it's worth, I'm finally getting my feet wet with programmable logic. I put it off before because I knew it'd would be a non trivial time investment to learn a language and a new way to implement HW designs, but the economic aspect drove me in this direction. Many of the project ideas I have cannot be economically created with discrete logic, and there are some features of existing projects (Link232 having Turbo232 compatibility) that fit best with programmable logic (the T232 has GALs to implement its functionality). I've chosen Verilog, since I'm a 'C' guy, and I grabbed Icarus Verilog to learn the ropes before fighting with vendor tools, though I downloaded the vendor tools as well (I used the schematic editor in the Xilinx tool to prove out an idea for one project, but quickly decided the schematic editor was less than ideal for programmable logic definition). Jim Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2010-02-04 16:00:04
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.