Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Simple CPU

simplecpu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–65 of 65 posts

Re: Simple CPU

#61

Post by programmer_dude »

couchand wrote: post #46
ajkjk wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be curious to poll people's experiences, but, I can say that I had never heard the term until today and I've known this stuff for a number of years. And it sounds silly and adds nothing. That too. (edit: my education on this stuff was in the 00's. Sounds like it was more common in the 80s. I'd definitely support obsoleting the term entirely now, though! It adds unnecessary complexity.)

It's yet another term that you can get by without knowing, and you'll probably be fine. But understanding why it's relevant to even have a word for it is the important insight. We should just as soon obsolete the term flip-flop.

> We should just as soon obsolete the term flip-flop

And replace it with what? Bistable multivibrator?

Re: Simple CPU

#62

Post by stevek »

greenster wrote: post #14

Reminds me of this course: http://nand2tetris.org/ Easily accessible, fun, and if you find it too simple, you can always introduce others to it.

I also really enjoyed the course. The book behind this course is called "The Elements of Computing Systems". I've been recommending it to lots of people.

Re: Simple CPU

#63

Post by natch »

This is really cool.

But. (Is there always a but?) it's very unapproachable. It has no welcome mat.

"Let's dive in" is normally an appreciated attitude, but here it makes it sound like we are coming in in the middle, and have missed the introduction. So, what is this thing? The page doesn't really say. There's an about page, but most people are too lazy to click. They want to see the value explained immediately, clearly, succinctly, on the landing page... or they're gone.

If they do click the About page, the writing is stilted, formal. But they don't, in most cases, I suspect.

When there are clickable images, it's not clear they are clickable. The text indicates you should click, but there are these huge arrows right there, and the obvious interpretation of the text is that you're supposed to click the arrows to see the image do its animation. Nope.

CPU is very jargonish as well. A better title would be something like "how computers work."

Still, nice design, beautifully made, good chunking of stuff into bite-sized pieces.

Re: Simple CPU

#64

Post by [deleted] »

timbt wrote: post #24

This is my first real introduction to uber-low level computer science. I managed the following super simple program: 1. 00000000 2. 00000001 3. 00000000 4. 00000001 5. 00000010 6. 00000011 7. 00000011 8. 00001010 9. 00000000 10. 00000001 The CPU jumps to the instruction at #4, which tells it to add the value of #2 to #3. The instructions at #7-#10 reset the instruction pointer to 00000001, so that it'll increment to…

[deleted]

Re: Simple CPU

#65

Post by ca98am79 »

acqq wrote: post #5

Here Feynman explains the basic logic behind building of all of the computers. He is inspiring even if you know more details about the topics he talks about, because he stimulates you to a fresh view. The youtube title is, IMHO, misleading. The lecture is about the basic hardware concepts and not about heuristics, so I think it fits perfectly with the OP. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWGGDXe5MA Edit: At the start…

Listening to the Q&A, I am surprised that, despite how much computers have changed in the last 30 years, how little has changed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWGGDXe5MA&feature=youtu.be...

Post reply on HN