Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site nbires.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!hao!nbires!rcd
From: rcd@nbires.UUCP (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: Timing loops
Message-ID: <635@nbires.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Feb-86 04:43:26 EST
Article-I.D.: nbires.635
Posted: Fri Feb 28 04:43:26 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Mar-86 00:28:24 EST
References: <3291@sun.uucp>
Distribution: net
Organization: NBI,Inc, Boulder CO
Lines: 21

Talking about the nasties of correcting funky hardware by putting in
software timing loops...
>...then you write whatever it takes to work
> (timing loop, simple assignment) and DOCUMENT THAT ASSUMPTION!!!
> right there, right then, at that line, at the top - but make
> it known to the next smuck.
> 
> I dont mind someone pulling stunts if it's NECESSARY, or sometimes just
> the way it is.  (some are amusing, no?) I DO mind not knowing when it's
> been done, and getting bit. 'nuff said?

The sentiment is right, but that doesn't solve the problem.  As whoever it
was (from SUN) said, suppose that you switch to a processor that's
functionally the same but has different timing.  Sure--you comment the
gotchas as best you can--but who's going to go looking for the comments
that indicate, say, specific gotchas between a 16.67 and 20 Mhz 68020???
And how do you find them?  Do you have a working ELCgrep (that's English-
Language, Conceptual grep)?
-- 
Dick Dunn	{hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd		(303)444-5710 x3086
   ...Worst-case analysis must never begin with "No one will ever want..."