Uroš,

1)    The overall of creating the emulator is to have a very fundamental 
understand of the architecture so that in the future a hardware replica can be 
created. With that in mind, we want to create the emulator as close to the 
internal functionality of the original WITCH. Because so many things are not 
know about the WITCH, we completely expect to discover aspects of the design 
while working on the emulator. So to answer your question: we want to be as 
close as possible to the original implementation.

2)    The WITCH uses several different I/O devices. First being punched paper 
tape readers. Once real tape readers are available and can be attached to the 
minnowboard max, the emulator should be able to support reading from the. In 
addition, there are two output devices, including a teletype printer and a 
punch paper tape printer. These too should be coded in such a way that they 
could either be simulated hardware or real hardware connected to the 
minnowboard max.

3)    This is something we are going to need to decide on prior to beginning 
the project.

4)    As stated above, we’d like to understand the architecture as much as 
possible so simulating the pulses is important to the overall design.

5)    Indeed we attempted visualize the dekatrons as part of the first 
emulator, however we found that it filled up the display pretty quickly. If we 
can get something together that is visually small enough and still provide 
valuable information, it is acceptable.

Thanks
Dave Anders


From: elinux-MinnowBoard [mailto:[email protected]] 
On Behalf Of Uros Tesic
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 6:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [MinnowBoard] GSoC-2015 WITCH-on-a-Board

Sorry for bothering you again, but I started writing the proposal, and I have a 
few questions.

1) The paper describes steps on the higher level (eg. implement division by 
chain subtraction). Are there any rigid rules that have to be followed (eg. 
surviving flow diagrams from the WITCH design stage), or we can use the paper 
as the guideline and implement WITCH according to that (improvise based on more 
modern architectures)?

2) As for the input-output, in the project you say that the abstract classes 
should be implemented so that later actual hardware can be connected to WITCH. 
What are the concrete IO systems WITCH should support at the end of GSoC? I was 
thinking file IO for testing. Other IO types can easily be reduced to file IO. 
Should IO system run in its own thread/s?

3) Should the control unit be implemented in software, or virtual hardware?

4) Should trains of pulses be shown, or sending a number they represent down 
the line object is enough?

5) You mentioned that hooking a simulator to the GTKWave should suffice. As the 
goal of this project is educational, I was thinking (if there is enough time) 
of making GUI in eg. QT. I am artistically challenged, but drawing lines and 
circles should suffice for Dekatrons.

Regards,
Uroš Tešić
_______________________________________________
elinux-MinnowBoard mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.elinux.org/mailman/listinfo/elinux-minnowboard

Reply via email to