Alan, So if I understand your criticism correctly,
Would I be putting words in your mouth to say that what you really don't like about the book is that it isn't what FONC is trying to set out to accomplish? In other words, you don't like it as much as you could because you think you can do better. (Which is fine, I am the same way with a lot of things I read, but when I am learning something for the first time, I don't have such high standards, since I don't have enough material to compare to.) I had not heard of Carver Mead's book before. I just picked it up via an online used books store. Thanks. On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Alan Kay <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Eric (and all) > > I read this a few years ago and I really wanted to like this book much more > than I did. > > I love the basic idea behind it. And I think a really good rendering of the > "from atoms to life" chain of meaning in computing would help many people, > especially students. > > However, it was the way they decided to cut corners (with both HW and SW) > that was really bothersome (and not necessary). For example, their target > language is really quite weak and also unreliable in many ways, but there > was no need for them to go in a kind of "weak C" direction. With less word > and better techniques they could get a very strong very high level language > directly supported by the HW. Similarly, I don't think they had looked at > the Mead-Conway book from the late 70s to get a handle on simple ways to > think of hardware organization, or at Chuck Thacker's Alto architecture from > PARC in the 70s to see how a few thousand gates can really be organized into > a powerful computation engine for emulation, etc. > > Cheers, > > Alan > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Erik Terpstra <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Mon, January 3, 2011 7:51:02 AM > *Subject:* [fonc] The Elements of Computing Systems > > A book called 'The Elements of Computing Systems' [1] describes the > construction of a very simple computing system including its hardware and > software. > You start with a NAND gate and while gradually working through the chapters > you implement memory, a CPU and later on an assembler, compiler, VM and a > very basic shell. > All this is implemented in an emulator that is provided on the book's > website [2]. > > I was wondering if there are people (who are familiar with the FONC/STEPS > project) that know this book, and what their ideas are on where the > implementation strategy taken in this book would differ from the > implementation (of a VERY basic) STEPS like system. > I'd imagine the hardware implementation would not differ very much, but > that the software would take an entirely different route early on (probably > focusing on an OMeta like implementation as early as possible). > > Any opinions on this would be greatly appreciated. I am quite curious if a > STEPS like strategy would be more efficient, easier or more succinct. > > --Erik > > [1] > http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Computing-Systems-Building-Principles/dp/026214087X > [2] http://www1.idc.ac.il/tecs/ > > P.S.: There is also a video that demonstrates some aspects of TECS: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtXvUoPx4Qs > P.S.2: You can find some sample chapters from the book here: > http://www1.idc.ac.il/tecs/plan.html > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > [email protected] > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > [email protected] > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > >
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
