| ??? 03/26/06 18:47 Read: times |
#113154 - ok, I'll rephrase Responding to: ???'s previous message |
In order to simulate timing problems related to talking with other chips, those other chips would also need to be simulated, which is a completely different project alltogether.
Saying that the emulation is worthless without that is a bit harsh (especially since I've already managed to debug some of my 8051 assembly with this simulator). Then, what about this it is simulation, NOT emulation. You, certainly can debug some things with a simulator, but what I stated was in reference to your "emulator" where what I stated is a requirement. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| new free 8052 emulator | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| If you're willing ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| emulation details | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Jump from emulator to model | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| We had 'em with HILO in '86 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sub-clock emulation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| well, to some extent you need to | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| worthlessness | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ok, I'll rephrase | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Windoze only? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| cross-platform | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You mean Simulator | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I'd guess he wanted to avoid that term | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| simulator vs emulator | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| well, then it is a simulator | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Reinventing the wheel is fun | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Sounds good to me | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Too many black box simulators | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I've got to agree | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
0.6 and stuff | 01/01/70 00:00 |