No problem, glad to have referred you to the paper, I hope it'll be useful. Just for everybody else on the list, the paper URL is http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/6334
> On Oct 19, 2013, at 4:08 PM, Petr Samarin <[email protected]> wrote: > > To be more specific, initially I want to replace the Java VM in JOP with a > Racket VM. > JOP is great as a starting point because it has many useful things available > from the start: support for USB and serial interfaces to load the bytecode > from the PC, memory interfaces, floating point unit. > > I haven't looked into the Scheme-79 paper yet (thanks for the reference by > the way!). > >> On Oct 19, 2013, at 1:35 PM, Alexander McLin wrote: >> I'd be interested in hearing how it's going! >> >> Just curious, are you reusing ideas from Scheme-79, or starting off in an >> entirely different direction? From your original email, I assume you're >> using JOP as a springing board? >> >> Alex >> >>> On Oct 19, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Petr Samarin <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> First I want to develop a small core (probably written in VHDL) that >>> supports a subset of Racket's bytecode. >>> I don't want to target any specific board/FPGA so that it can be used >>> anywhere. >>> But during development I will be testing the core on the board that I have >>> at home (DE2-70 from Terrasic). >>> >>> When the basic version is done, I am also interested in how much >>> parallelism can be achieved on the VM level (adding more stacks, executing >>> several bytecodes at once, etc.). >>> >>> Petr >>> >>>> On Oct 19, 2013, at 12:26 AM, Neil Van Dyke wrote: >>>> Petr, I will be very interested to hear how this project goes, including >>>> which FPGA you end up targeting, your application (large-scale parallel? >>>> low power?), and how speed compares to the JIT'd VM running on CPUs. >>>> >>>> If you can use an open source toolchain, all the better, although a >>>> free-as-in-beer toolchain would also be OK if the open source ones don't >>>> support your target. If it requires an expensive toolchain, it's still a >>>> good project, but much harder for other people to build on after you are >>>> done. (The beefier FPGAs I was looking at in the last year, for numeric >>>> computing, seemed to require expensive proprietary toolchains.) >>>> >>>> Neil V. >>> >>> >>> ____________________ >>> Racket Users list: >>> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
