On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 04:16:38PM +0100, silverdr_at_wfmh.org.pl wrote: > The reason I don't subscribe is that the same as before we're not on the same page when it comes to definitions of important terms/their scopes and contexts, like > > - when emulation stops being one and becomes prototype > - when emulation stops being one and becomes real thing Well, what do you call emulation? Many CPUs cannot actually execute all instructions of their architecture: they emulate some (often using microcode or similar). And any Turing machine can emulate any other Turing machine. (Not that you can actually build any Turing machine: infinite memory is required). > - when a "PGA" (like the one originally used for PLA implementation) is the real thing and when not > - what constitutes the core functionality/logic and what the supporting infrastructure > - probably more > > And I somehow don't see us finding common frame of reference on those any time soon :-) Most of it is philosophy and not practically interesting at all. SegherReceived on 2021-02-25 23:00:03
Archive generated by hypermail 2.3.0.