Ramone, you do realize any Tom, Dick, or Harry can walk in and post a list of dates right?
In fact, there are probably many right here who do this daily, or have input into such, or have to live by such.
We all want to know the same things, and we're all quite clear on what a monumental task it is they have in front of them.
Your task list might have gotten a better response and action, if it were not weighed down with some unrealistic expectations.
Saying it'll be ready when its ready, well its far more true for Parallax than it ever was for iD. iD had $$/capitol to burn, and even then, they still had a pinch-point with Carmack. Parallax is in much the same position, if not far more difficult.
To be honest, I am not sure where you come in with "The purpose of this thread was to check the grade of commitment for completion from Parallax itself. "
I've been less than pleased as times with some of the lac of communication from Parallax, however they've been footing a $million or two for R&D, and Chip suffered a minor heart attack just recently, no doubt at least partially due to the workload.
So, as someone who swings by every 5-6 months to the forum, I don't see where anyone has any need to provide you with anything whatsoever.
I'll end by noting that when I asked for actual commitments from people to help Parallax move ahead, I didn't see any from you.
EDIT- I see T Chap basically addressed this just previously.
The purpose of this thread was to check the grade of commitment for completion from Parallax itself.
An attempt to obtain any more detailed information than just the politically-correct and forum-auto-imposed sencence "the P2 will be done when it is ready."
All you can made your guess about when this project will finish.
Can you point out which instructions have not been tested yet.
If I remember correctly, Seairth developed some scripts (that were previously created by Chip?)
Are you using those? or other scripts by your own?
How is testing currently done, and how long does it takes?
Where exactly did this magical and arbitrary 1 MONTH come from ??
It was choosen based on the fact that FPGA v1 was released 18 months ago. I was thinking that there should be already some automatized way to partially test the instruction set. I remember that Chip, and Seairth published some scripts.
Does anyone know 'how' and 'when' gcc will start? Will be done after spin, or in parallel?
What is needed to help with gcc development? it can't be started because the instruction set, or is there any other prerequisite that prevent gcc to be started? I am scared to ask if someone can made an educated guess about how long could it take to develop gcc to P2 v16 but I think someone need to ask that, so here it goes.
Does anyone know 'how' and 'when' gcc will start? Will be done after spin, or in parallel?
What is needed to help with gcc development? it can't be started because the instruction set, or is there any other prerequisite that prevent gcc to be started? I am scared to ask if someone can made an educated guess about how long could it take to develop gcc to P2 v16 but I think someone need to ask that, so here it goes.
It's all a function of finances, risk, and market. From a financial perspective we'd probably start GCC development when we have ample funds, internally or externally generated.
From a risk perspective, a GCC compiler would likely not begin until we have working P2 chips. I am fully aware of the risks of making more investments into R&D - a false start on software is very unproductive.
From a marketing perspective, a GCC compiler would be started when we believe we can grow revenues as a result of having the compiler. As we have not performed as a traditional semiconductor company (with external funding or more reserve funds from sales, a very targeted market, accompanied with frequent Propeller releases) the likely market trigger is education. Education is a market where we've proven to have traction and customers. Would they need this compiler to improve their programs or is the P1 enough?
Put it all together, find the union (is that the right word?) of conditions and we'd probably start a GCC compiler after we have revenue from P2 sales (low risk, not leveraging anything further than we've already done), when educational customers begin to ask for it, and when we have the funds.
Parallax is a bootstrapped company. We make two dollars and reinvest one. We're not funded externally for several reasons, and this slows our development. Crowdsourcing could speed things up for us.
Thanks Ken for giving all those points of view. Makes sense, and I understand that gcc doesn't have the same priority as spin have (from educative perspective).
Having a draft of SPIN 2 is gonna help too. We get an overlap in testing SPIN 2, in-line PASM, etc... It's a two-fer.
How is SPIN 2 going to be developped?
Chip is currently gathering feedback about syntax and other things. And Roy offered openspin.
Will Chip build all that in his head and someday we will find the finished interpreter like he did before? or he will just write a draft about how spin 2 syntax should be, so others can develop in parallel with him, or together with openspin source code?.
...we'd probably start a GCC compiler after we have revenue from P2 sales (low risk, not leveraging anything further than we've already done), when educational customers begin to ask for it, and when we have the funds.
Eeek. Understandable but ... eeek.
Sounds like I'll have to blow the dust of the Zog ZPU emulator and port it to the P2. Gotta get C on the P2 somehow.
Comments
In fact, there are probably many right here who do this daily, or have input into such, or have to live by such.
We all want to know the same things, and we're all quite clear on what a monumental task it is they have in front of them.
Your task list might have gotten a better response and action, if it were not weighed down with some unrealistic expectations.
Saying it'll be ready when its ready, well its far more true for Parallax than it ever was for iD. iD had $$/capitol to burn, and even then, they still had a pinch-point with Carmack. Parallax is in much the same position, if not far more difficult.
To be honest, I am not sure where you come in with "The purpose of this thread was to check the grade of commitment for completion from Parallax itself. "
I've been less than pleased as times with some of the lac of communication from Parallax, however they've been footing a $million or two for R&D, and Chip suffered a minor heart attack just recently, no doubt at least partially due to the workload.
So, as someone who swings by every 5-6 months to the forum, I don't see where anyone has any need to provide you with anything whatsoever.
I'll end by noting that when I asked for actual commitments from people to help Parallax move ahead, I didn't see any from you.
EDIT- I see T Chap basically addressed this just previously.
If I remember correctly, Seairth developed some scripts (that were previously created by Chip?)
Are you using those? or other scripts by your own?
How is testing currently done, and how long does it takes?
It was choosen based on the fact that FPGA v1 was released 18 months ago. I was thinking that there should be already some automatized way to partially test the instruction set. I remember that Chip, and Seairth published some scripts.
Does anyone know 'how' and 'when' gcc will start? Will be done after spin, or in parallel?
What is needed to help with gcc development? it can't be started because the instruction set, or is there any other prerequisite that prevent gcc to be started? I am scared to ask if someone can made an educated guess about how long could it take to develop gcc to P2 v16 but I think someone need to ask that, so here it goes.
It's all a function of finances, risk, and market. From a financial perspective we'd probably start GCC development when we have ample funds, internally or externally generated.
From a risk perspective, a GCC compiler would likely not begin until we have working P2 chips. I am fully aware of the risks of making more investments into R&D - a false start on software is very unproductive.
From a marketing perspective, a GCC compiler would be started when we believe we can grow revenues as a result of having the compiler. As we have not performed as a traditional semiconductor company (with external funding or more reserve funds from sales, a very targeted market, accompanied with frequent Propeller releases) the likely market trigger is education. Education is a market where we've proven to have traction and customers. Would they need this compiler to improve their programs or is the P1 enough?
Put it all together, find the union (is that the right word?) of conditions and we'd probably start a GCC compiler after we have revenue from P2 sales (low risk, not leveraging anything further than we've already done), when educational customers begin to ask for it, and when we have the funds.
Parallax is a bootstrapped company. We make two dollars and reinvest one. We're not funded externally for several reasons, and this slows our development. Crowdsourcing could speed things up for us.
Ken Gracey
How is SPIN 2 going to be developped?
Chip is currently gathering feedback about syntax and other things. And Roy offered openspin.
Will Chip build all that in his head and someday we will find the finished interpreter like he did before? or he will just write a draft about how spin 2 syntax should be, so others can develop in parallel with him, or together with openspin source code?.
Sounds like I'll have to blow the dust of the Zog ZPU emulator and port it to the P2. Gotta get C on the P2 somehow.