On September 18, 2012 at 3:00 PM email@example.com wrote: > > On 2012-09-18, at 20:04, Jim Brain wrote: > > > > As it was a late addition, I chose a quick and dirty solution. I defend it > > as: > > I believe there is no need to be defensive about anything here :-) > > > [...] It basically boils down to how much the OP wants to solder. > > Since /me is the OP, the answer is: I want it to be as academically pure as > possible. As long as academic approach does not hinder practicality that is > :-) In other words: I treat it as production quality. The balance and > potential compromises have to be done between technical correctness and > versatility of the solution and its cost plus power/footprint requirements. > That means the most versatile and technically correct solution with the lowest > cost and smallest power and footprint (both parts, and wiring/routing) > requirements is most preferred. Then I would use an all '11 design. A bit cheaper, easier to source and stock :-). no unused gates. Jim > > -- > SD! > Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2012-09-19 21:01:01
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.