Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >That's fine. I was thinking of smaller processors that might be used in
>> >embedded apps and such. (I'm also not sure what's the most efficient
>> >integer representation on things like the ARM microprocessors are)
>>
>>ARM7/ARM9 are both 32-bit
>>MIPS has both 32-bit and 64-bit variants.
>
>That's good. Though do either of them have 16-bit data busses?
Not at the CPU no - what happens at chip boundary depends on what customer
asks for.
The 68XXX in Palm-Pilots are the issue there.
>
>>DSPs are more messy.
>
>That's probably a bit too specialized a piece of hardware to worry about.
>Unlss things have changed lately, they're not really general-purpose CPUs.
Some of them are.
>
>>It is micro-controllers that you have to worry about
>
>Yeak, I know a lot of the old 8 and 16 bit chips are in use as control
>devices places. Those are the ones I'm thinking about. (Not that hard, but
>I don't want to rule them out needlessly)
I suspect that any that are up to running anything approximating perl
will have 32-bit ops in a library in any case.
>
--
Nick Ing-Simmons
