At 17.59 2011.10.17, you wrote:
>
>
>alan.b.pearce@stfc.ac.uk wrote:
>
>> > I believe PDP11 fails modern RISC tests because it uses a memory/
>> > register architecture for most operations, and supports double memory
>> > operands as well.  But I've also been surprised that no one has simply
>> > duplicated a PDP11-on-a-chip (not counting DEC themselves.) (I guess
>> > that 64k address space is a bit quaint these days...)
>>
>> I think it was Fairchild who were making a PDP-on-a-chip - but I=20
>think it used the PDP-8 architecture. AFAIK it never made it to=20
>market, although I did see marketing literature.
>
>Their were a couple PDP8 on a chip parts made. I used a few IM6100 and=20
>IM6110 parts made by intersil. Both Western Digital and DEC made PDP11=20
>on 3 or 4 chips

http://www.google.com/#sclient=3Dpsy-ab&hl=3Den&source=3Dhp&q=3DPDP11+on+a+=
FPGA&pbx=3D1&oq=3DPDP11+on+a+FPGA&aq=3Df&aqi=3D&aql=3D1&gs_sm=3Ds&gs_upl=3D=
3505l3505l0l4838l1l1l0l0l0l0l1169l1169l7-1l1l0&bav=3Don.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.=
osb&fp=3Dbd638b897581bb57&biw=3D1728&bih=3D914

;-)

Whatever is the subject, if you google <projectname> on a FPGA you will
almost certainly find that someone has implemented it. :D

Gotta go, I have to enter granny on a FPGA on Google :P


>
>w..
>
>
>--=20
>http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
>View/change your membership options at
>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.