Incidentally, I wondered about the cycle-accuracy of the emulation. Could we have accurare emulation of ARM2/250/3 level performance even if we can't emulate the hardware of the Archimedes at this point?
On 3 March 2018 at 22:46, J Percival <[email protected]> wrote: > It's strange that Acorn were...at least in some people's opinion - big on > backwards compatibility - but compared to the PC world, they didn't seem to > do it very well. > Regarding Arculator/RPCEmu, I don't know, but looking at > http://b-em.bbcmicro.com/arculator/ V0.1 of Arculator came out before > V0.1 (or any version) of RPCEmu. > > On 3 March 2018 at 21:36, Peter Howkins <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 04:20:58PM +0000, Gerald Holdsworth wrote: >> > Probably a stupid question, but, I’ve been thinking recently, how >> difficult >> > would it be to extend the RPCemu emulation to emulate the ARM2, ARM250, >> > and ARM3 processors in order to run Arthur, RISC OS 2 and RISC OS 3 in >> > (and, effectively, emulate an Archimedes)? >> >> It's a large amount of work for archimedes support, of which the ARM is >> the relatively easy bit. >> >> I've considered it, but it's a long long way from happening anytime soon. >> >> > Didn’t RPCemu evolve from Arculator, originally? >> >> I think it might have been the other way round, though I'm not sure. They >> both shared a large chunk of code. >> >> In general, stick to Arculator, if it does what you want it too. >> >> Peter >> >> -- >> Peter Howkins >> [email protected] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rpcemu mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.riscos.info/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rpcemu >> > >
_______________________________________________ Rpcemu mailing list [email protected] http://www.riscos.info/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rpcemu
