Ok, those diagrams on page 18/19 of this Hardware Manual are indeed confusing (or wrong?), because you can use a register, which has just been written back.
In my example about detecting birds, for example 5% false results are not a big problem. In my opinion such level of false information is not at all acceptable for a microcontroller document, because false information can easily cost hours or days for Parallax customers. So I am wondering, if AI can be forced to double check somehow.
There is never ever a fixed 2-cycle stall on anything. Hub/CORDIC stalls are variable length. (technically long instructions like MIXPIX could also be considered a pipe stall, but that's not really a good way to think of it).
Dumbass bot is regurgitating info related to old-style RISC processors, which do have register hazards like that (the good ones, anyways, the bad ones just let you read the stale register)
I remain validated in my assertion that this is all a really terrible idea.
Comments
Ok, those diagrams on page 18/19 of this Hardware Manual are indeed confusing (or wrong?), because you can use a register, which has just been written back.
In my example about detecting birds, for example 5% false results are not a big problem. In my opinion such level of false information is not at all acceptable for a microcontroller document, because false information can easily cost hours or days for Parallax customers. So I am wondering, if AI can be forced to double check somehow.
There is never ever a fixed 2-cycle stall on anything. Hub/CORDIC stalls are variable length. (technically long instructions like MIXPIX could also be considered a pipe stall, but that's not really a good way to think of it).
Dumbass bot is regurgitating info related to old-style RISC processors, which do have register hazards like that (the good ones, anyways, the bad ones just let you read the stale register)
I remain validated in my assertion that this is all a really terrible idea.