Welcome to the Parallax Discussion Forums, sign-up to participate.
User Name wrote: »
I'm actually surprised that the SX isn't known to practically everyone here. Parallax was selling SX chips and tools years before the P1 was born. They still have tens of thousands of them for sale right now. Leon's terse description of it was very apt.
While the SX and the Propeller are both microcontrollers, they are very different (8-bit vs 32-bit, single-core vs 8-core, etc.). I'm certainly not recommending it as a competitor or alternative to the Propeller for general purpose use. We were talking emulation...and nothing I've ever used can shove eight bits around faster. So I was suggesting that the SX could function as an old-fashioned control store, microsequencer, and ALU.
¿Entiendes Mendez o te lo explico Federico?
jimigou wrote: »
So, do you think it would make a better base for 6809 emulation?
The 6809 has one 16 bit accumulator and the 6309 has two and one 32 bit.
But that might not hinder emulation.
Heater. wrote: »
Despite having been hanging around the embedded systems industry for decades in Europe and followed the progress of all the big names in micro-controllers and embedded processors, Intel, Motorola, ATMEL, Microchip, ARM, and so on I have never seen anyone use SX chips. Indeed I had not even heard of Parallax, SX or Propeller until a hand full of years back. I guess that is why there is now Parallax Semiconductor.
Given that the SX is now obsolete and on life support I would not be inclined to invest any serious effort into it. My curiosity might get me to dabble a bit though.
An implementation for the Propeller has the great advantage that it will be easily portable to the Prop II where there is a lot more room and speed.