It wasn't necessary. But, even with the well established core ,memory it was usual to use a single parity bit on each byte and our original intention was to continue that practice. but with the 64 bit word we were using that meant that there would be eight parity bits and some bright spark - not me - quickly realised that those bits could be better employed in a Hamming configuration. Semiconductor memory was very new in 1970 and we had some reservations about its robustness. On 5 September 2016 at 18:28, John Gardner wrote: > ... Hamming was revelation to me: such an elegant solution. > > In regard to the elegance of Hamming, I concur. > > I'm curious about why a Hamming implementation was necessary > > with RAM? (A question, no implied criticism...) > -- > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 __________________________________________ David C Brown 43 Bings Road Whaley Bridge High Peak Phone: 01663 733236 Derbyshire eMail: dcb.home@gmail.com SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb *Sent from my etch-a-sketch* --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .