three computing drawbacks

Discussion in 'Perl Misc' started by George Mpouras, Jul 22, 2013.

  1. Not exactly a perl thread. Here are the three drawbacks (I think) that
    have kept computing back

    1) Binary system. For digital processors should be three or four states
    so with the same hardware everything would be four times faster.

    2) Bytes should have arbitrary length of “tribits†or “tetrabits
    (Unicode is a definition because of the fixed 8bit bytes)

    3) Clocks. Everything should be absolute asynchronous so the
    chips/electronic would utilized only when needed. Less energy greedy and
    faster
     
    George Mpouras, Jul 22, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. George Mpouras

    Uri Guttman Guest

    >>>>> "GM" == George Mpouras <> writes:

    GM> Not exactly a perl thread. Here are the three drawbacks (I think)
    GM> that have kept computing back

    GM> 1) Binary system. For digital processors should be three or four
    GM> states so with the same hardware everything would be four times
    GM> faster.

    been tried. some old russian system had 3 voltage states. much harder to
    create in general and likely almost impossible on the scale of todays
    chips. having a transistor go all the way on or off is easy. having a
    circuit to check the level of voltage accurate is much more
    complex. also the logic tables are not easily coded for. what are the
    'tri-boolean' function results? also you don't get speedup, you gain
    'density' but density is very very cheap now.

    GM> 2) Bytes should have arbitrary length of “tribits†or “tetrabits
    GM> (Unicode is a definition because of the fixed 8bit bytes)

    already done. see PDP-10/decsystem 10 or 20. so unusable that a c
    compiler on a dec 20 i used had to put each char in a 36 bit word. bytes
    are any size you want on that cpu and sequential access support is built
    in. random access is very tricky and slow as code has to do it.

    GM> 3) Clocks. Everything should be absolute asynchronous so the
    GM> chips/electronic would utilized only when needed. Less energy
    GM> greedy and faster

    also done already. it is a known thing that async hw will be faster and
    use lower power. the problem is with design. sync systems are easier to
    design with everything being latched at one time. you can isolate
    sections and such. an async chip is much harder to design and it still
    needs sync parts to connect to the outside world.

    any other 'new' ideas that are actually very old?? :)

    thanx,

    uri
     
    Uri Guttman, Jul 22, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On 2013-07-23 12:32, Shmuel Metz <> wrote:
    > In <ksij93$f0k$>, on 07/22/2013
    > at 09:26 AM, George Mpouras
    ><> said:
    >>3) Clocks. Everything should be absolute asynchronous

    >
    > Again, you are calling for additional complexity without providing
    > justification. Designers are aware of asynchronous logic and use it
    > when they believe that the benefits outweigh the costs.


    Here is an article which presents some justification:
    http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2012/10/155552-the-tyranny-of-the-clock/fulltext
    It also mentions a few reasons why clock-less logic is rarely used.

    hp


    --
    _ | Peter J. Holzer | Fluch der elektronischen Textverarbeitung:
    |_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | Man feilt solange an seinen Text um, bis
    | | | | die Satzbestandteile des Satzes nicht mehr
    __/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | zusammenpaßt. -- Ralph Babel
     
    Peter J. Holzer, Jul 23, 2013
    #3
  4. I remember solving differential equations with capacitors and coils at the
    lab.
    Soem guys displayed fractals at the oscillograph !
     
    George Mpouras, Jul 24, 2013
    #4
  5. I have first pesrson experience Shmuel !
     
    George Mpouras, Jul 26, 2013
    #5
  6. >>>>> "GM" == George Mpouras
    >>>>> <>
    >>>>> writes:


    GM> I have first pesrson experience Shmuel !

    It would be a courtesy if you would start quoting enough context to make
    your posts comprehensible.

    Charlton


    --
    Charlton Wilbur
     
    Charlton Wilbur, Jul 26, 2013
    #6
  7. > It would be a courtesy if you would start quoting enough context to make
    > your posts comprehensible.
    >
    > Charlton


    Do you think quoting is so important any more with the tree view readers
    like thunderbid ?
     
    George Mpouras, Jul 26, 2013
    #7
  8. George Mpouras

    Jim Gibson Guest

    In article <ksusp9$1js5$>, George Mpouras
    <> wrote:

    > > It would be a courtesy if you would start quoting enough context to make
    > > your posts comprehensible.
    > >
    > > Charlton

    >
    > Do you think quoting is so important any more with the tree view readers
    > like thunderbid ?


    I am not using Thunderbird. My Usenet reader only shows one message at
    a time. I believe many Usenet readers do the same. This is preferrable
    to me, as I do not wish to see the entire thread each time I read the
    newest posting.

    If I want to see previous messages, I have to click on a link to see
    the entire previous message, which does not have the latest posting in
    it.

    Therefore: yes, quoting to what your are responding is important for
    some of us.

    --
    Jim Gibson
     
    Jim Gibson, Jul 27, 2013
    #8
  9. George Mpouras

    Scott Bryce Guest

    On 7/26/2013 4:21 PM, George Mpouras wrote:
    > Do you think quoting is so important any more with the tree view
    > readers like thunderbid ?


    I use Thunderbird, but I don't have it in tree view mode. I have it sort
    posts by date. That way the most recent posts are at the bottom, and I
    don't have to go looking for them. So, even for users of Thunderbird,
    quoting can be very helpful.
     
    Scott Bryce, Jul 27, 2013
    #9
  10. >>>>> "GM" == George Mpouras
    >>>>> <>
    >>>>> writes:


    >> It would be a courtesy if you would start quoting enough context
    >> to make your posts comprehensible.


    GM> Do you think quoting is so important any more with the tree view
    GM> readers like thunderbid ?

    Point the first: if I did not, would I have admonished you for not
    quoting?

    Point the second: it would be a further courtesy if you did not make
    unwarranted assumptions about what tools other people use.

    When you write a post with no context whatsoever and impose a burden on
    me of having to figure out what you're responding to before I determine
    whether you're talking out of your ass or not, you move the default
    assumption to "he's talking out of his ass" and you move the bozometer
    one notch closer to "plonk." You may not care about that, but I
    consider it a courtesy to warn you that you are barreling at high speed
    down that path.

    Charlton


    --
    Charlton Wilbur
     
    Charlton Wilbur, Jul 27, 2013
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Lucas Tam
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,384
    bruce barker
    Jul 15, 2004
  2. Logician
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,904
    S. Justin Gengo
    Sep 19, 2005
  3. munni

    drawbacks of linux

    munni, Feb 8, 2006, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    354
    Chris Dollin
    Feb 8, 2006
  4. optical supercomputing

    Optical Computing: special issue - Natural Computing, Springer

    optical supercomputing, Dec 19, 2008, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    441
    optical supercomputing
    Dec 19, 2008
  5. optical supercomputing

    Optical Computing: special issue - Natural Computing, Springer

    optical supercomputing, Jan 16, 2009, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    462
    optical supercomputing
    Jan 16, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page