I see this email in my Draft folder. I guess I forgot to send it... A little more...
I myself started using nuttx because it was posix and it was stable. Not because I could run it on 8bit atmega. If it were up to me I would just kill support for 8bit and 16bit MCUs (far pointers, eww). It sounds cool to support them, but it adds maintenance burden. And people will use something much smaller for 8bit and 16bit MCUs are used only by that one nerd that just love those shenanigans with memory addressing. I don't think bit width is the critical thing. Many "narrow" MCUs can support quite large address spaces. ROM space, in particular. But we are on the same wavelength here. I don't think we should drag around ports to processor architectures that can never be supported such as processors with hard limitations to 64 bit address spaces or limited ROM that stifles growth and forces ugly compromises. Nor do I think we should support lower end of architectures with insufficient resources. The future of NuttX is not in minimal hardware support (I was originally, but those time have passed)
