> > > > I _think_ 12 bits is long enough for each integer, but should we plan > > > > for 13 or 14 to future-proof it?
> > > Future proofing is way overrated. It will be very easy to change > > Not if there aren't enough DIP switches on the board. > In that unlikely event there will be a new board with more DIP switches > and a new FPGA image. A DDC injection box is independant of the FPGA. The OGC isn't going to have a FPGA. The DDC injection box could also be used with a brand-x video chip, which isn't going to have a FPGA. [ bunch of reasons to not add features ] > I think all the above apply to this discussion. The question isn't about adding an additional feature, but of providing space for future use. > In any case, as long as we are only working on the prototype card Maybe you are only working on the prototype card, but some of us are trying to plan ahead. > As far as I can tell, there is NO serious need to worry about boutique > frequencies until we get to the detailed planning stage of the ASIC > version. The DDC injection box can be designed in parallel with development of OGD and OGC. Once it is designed, someone can build a prototype and test it with a brand-x graphics chip. If the chips used are available as DIPs, a prototype can be build using a solderless breadboard, without making, or even laying out, a PCB. If there are any problems, they can be found early and addressed. The earlier problems are found the easier and cheaper they are to fix. As far as the extra bits question, there is the intermediate solution: lay out the board with spots for extra bits, but don't stuff those parts. Although I fear this might get messy, and probably be more trouble than it is worth. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
