Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

    #1

    Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D


    Has anyone here got access to a ridiculous computer? Something like:

    CHAR_BIT == 9
    PADDING_BITS(in t) != 0
    NUMBER_SYSTEM == SIGN_MAGNITUDE
    Null pointer bit pattern == All ones

    I'm writing some fully-portable code and would love to actually compile it
    for, and test it on, a very strange machine :-D

    Or does anyone know of a particular machine I could get my hands on very
    cheaply just for playing around with, something very strange which I can
    get a compliant C89 compiler for? An old supercomputer perhaps? The main
    thing I'd want is a strange value for CHAR_BIT, but I'd be ecstatic if the
    integer types had padding aswell!

    --
    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe
  • Keith Thompson

    #2
    Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

    "Tomás Ó hÉilidhe" <toe@lavabit.co mwrites:
    Has anyone here got access to a ridiculous computer? Something like:
    >
    CHAR_BIT == 9
    PADDING_BITS(in t) != 0
    NUMBER_SYSTEM == SIGN_MAGNITUDE
    Null pointer bit pattern == All ones
    >
    I'm writing some fully-portable code and would love to actually compile it
    for, and test it on, a very strange machine :-D
    >
    Or does anyone know of a particular machine I could get my hands on very
    cheaply just for playing around with, something very strange which I can
    get a compliant C89 compiler for? An old supercomputer perhaps? The main
    thing I'd want is a strange value for CHAR_BIT, but I'd be ecstatic if the
    integer types had padding aswell!
    Your best bet for CHAR_BIT 8 is probably a DSP (Digital Signal
    Processor), but I think those systems tend not to have hosted C
    implementations (i.e., much of the standard library may be missing).

    You *might* be able to obtain an old working supercomputer for not too
    much money, but the power and air conditioning costs are likely to be
    huge. In any case, on the relatively old supercomputers I've used
    (Cray T90), CHAR_BIT==8 (the compiler went to considerable effort to
    make this work, even though the hardware didn't support 8-bit memory
    access. But I believe at least some of the predefined integer types
    did have padding bits.

    cray-cyber.org offers free access to some old supercomputers; some of
    them are available 24/7, others are not.

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) <kst-u@mib.org>
    [...]
    "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

    Comment

    • Walter Roberson

      #3
      Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

      In article <Xns9A18EBF80CB 1Etoelavabitcom @194.125.133.14 >,
      Tomás Ó hÉilidhe <toe@lavabit.co mwrote:
      >Has anyone here got access to a ridiculous computer? Something like:
      CHAR_BIT == 9
      Possibly you could use one of the emulators at simh.trailing-edge.com.

      "SIMH implements simulators for:

      * Data General Nova, Eclipse
      * Digital Equipment Corporation PDP-1, PDP-4, PDP-7, PDP-8, PDP-9, PDP-10, PDP-11, PDP-15, VAX
      * GRI Corporation GRI-909
      * IBM 1401, 1620, 1130, 7090/7094, System 3
      * Interdata (Perkin-Elmer) 16b and 32b systems
      * Hewlett-Packard 2114, 2115, 2116, 2100, 21MX
      * Honeywell H316/H516
      * MITS Altair 8800, with both 8080 and Z80
      * Royal-Mcbee LGP-30, LGP-21
      * Scientific Data Systems SDS 940"
      --
      "There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person
      could believe in them." -- George Orwell

      Comment

      • Thad Smith

        #4
        Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

        "Tomï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½" wrote:
        >
        Has anyone here got access to a ridiculous computer? Something like:
        >
        CHAR_BIT == 9
        PADDING_BITS(in t) != 0
        NUMBER_SYSTEM == SIGN_MAGNITUDE
        Null pointer bit pattern == All ones
        >
        I'm writing some fully-portable code and would love to actually compile
        it for, and test it on, a very strange machine :-D
        Such a machine would be interesting for testing portability. The best
        solution is a configurable simulator and compiler that lets you specify
        many of these implementation-defined and otherwise variable attributes.

        Writing the simulator sounds interesting -- writing a configurable compiler
        seems like a lot of work!

        Perhaps something based on a C language interpreter would be better. Are
        there any C interpreters that would make a good starting point for a
        configurable target?

        --
        Thad

        Comment

        • Randy Howard

          #5
          Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

          On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 17:11:48 -0600, Tomás Ó hÉilidhe wrote
          (in article <Xns9A18EBF80CB 1Etoelavabitcom @194.125.133.14 >):
          >
          Has anyone here got access to a ridiculous computer? Something like:
          >
          CHAR_BIT == 9
          PADDING_BITS(in t) != 0
          NUMBER_SYSTEM == SIGN_MAGNITUDE
          Null pointer bit pattern == All ones
          >
          I'm writing some fully-portable code and would love to actually compile it
          for, and test it on, a very strange machine :-D
          >
          Or does anyone know of a particular machine I could get my hands on very
          cheaply just for playing around with, something very strange which I can
          get a compliant C89 compiler for? An old supercomputer perhaps? The main
          thing I'd want is a strange value for CHAR_BIT, but I'd be ecstatic if the
          integer types had padding aswell!
          >

          There was a DS9K for sale on ebay last week, but somebody snapped it
          up.

          --
          Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
          "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
          who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw





          Comment

          • Eric Sosman

            #6
            Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

            Randy Howard wrote:
            On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 17:11:48 -0600, Tomás Ó hÉilidhe wrote
            >>
            >I'm writing some fully-portable code and would love to actually compile it
            >for, and test it on, a very strange machine :-D
            >>
            >Or does anyone know of a particular machine I could get my hands on very
            >cheaply just for playing around with, something very strange which I can
            >get a compliant C89 compiler for? An old supercomputer perhaps? The main
            >thing I'd want is a strange value for CHAR_BIT, but I'd be ecstatic if the
            >integer types had padding aswell!
            >>
            >
            There was a DS9K for sale on ebay last week, but somebody snapped it
            up.
            ... and left the seller negative feedback, in ones' complement.

            More seriously: The IBM AS/400 (iSeries?) is said to handle
            pointers in a way that trashes some widely-held but non-portable
            assumptions. It doesn't meet all your requirements for strange-
            sized characters and so on, but it might be worth while seeing
            whether IBM operates a public grid or something on which they'll
            rent you some time. (If your stated goal is an AS/400 port of
            the software, they might even waive a chunk of the rental.)

            --
            Eric Sosman
            esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid

            Comment

            • Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

              #7
              Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D


              I came across Univac machines today. Supposedly one of them had 72-Bit
              bytes.

              I also read that one of their machines consumed 125 kW :-O I plugged
              two 2 kilowatt heaters into an extension lead today, and the *extension
              lead* got nice and hot, never mind the heaters.

              --
              Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

              Comment

              • Philip Potter

                #8
                Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

                "Tomï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½" wrote:
                I came across Univac machines today. Supposedly one of them had 72-Bit
                bytes.
                >
                I also read that one of their machines consumed 125 kW :-O I plugged
                two 2 kilowatt heaters into an extension lead today, and the *extension
                lead* got nice and hot, never mind the heaters.
                <offtopic>
                Don't Do That. At least in the UK, 4kW through one plug is over 17A of
                current (230V voltage), and you shouldn't ever try to draw more than 13A
                through a plug. Many house fires have been started in this way.

                In other countries, it's still a bad idea, though the details may differ.
                </offtopic>

                PS: FYI, your name is still screwed in my newsreader.

                Comment

                • Randy Howard

                  #9
                  Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

                  On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 05:04:18 -0600, Philip Potter wrote
                  (in article <fll3rj$kh9$1@a ioe.org>):
                  PS: FYI, your name is still screwed in my newsreader.
                  Get a better one.

                  --
                  Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
                  "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
                  who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw





                  Comment

                  • Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

                    #10
                    Too much current

                    Philip Potter <pgp@doc.ic.ac. ukwrote in comp.lang.c:
                    Don't Do That. At least in the UK, 4kW through one plug is over 17A of
                    current (230V voltage), and you shouldn't ever try to draw more than
                    13A through a plug. Many house fires have been started in this way.
                    (I find the ambiguous spelling of "lead" irritating so I'm going to
                    replace it with "led" or "leed" where applicable)

                    The extension leed has four sockets, each of which leed to a common 13 A
                    fuse.

                    I should be able to plug whatever I want in wherever I want... worst case
                    scenario being a blown fuse.

                    (I originally set out writing this post to prove you wrong... but I did
                    the calculations and you turned out to be right)

                    Power = Voltage * Current
                    4000 = 230 * Current

                    Current = 4000 / 230 = 17.4 A

                    My original argument would have been that I should be able to plug
                    anything in wherever I want because the plugs all have 13 A fuses, but
                    now I'm at a loss to explain why a fuse wasn't blown when I was drawing
                    17.4 amps through one plug... ?

                    There's only two reasonable conclusions I can draw. Either:

                    A) The fuse is letting 17 A pass, and so isn't really a 13 A fuse at all.
                    B) Each heater is in fact only 1.5 kW (or maybe just one of them is
                    weaker)

                    Anyway, a question I'd like to ask: Should an actual plug or leed
                    ever become hot? Because the plastic of the plug from the extension leed
                    going into the wall was pretty hot, as was the leed.

                    I'm an electronic engineer myself but I still wouldn't have batted an
                    eyelid about plugging things in willy-nilly, (even into a mutli-adapter),
                    because the worst thing that should happen is a blown fuse.

                    I bought a smoke alarm along with the heaters though, just in case,
                    and I have it mounted right above them. I've got smoke alarms on the
                    ceilings of the rooms in my house, but I've also got ones mounted
                    specifically above high-risk devices (my washing machine, dryer, and the
                    heaters). I've only ever had one fire in my house and it was in a washing
                    machine; thankfully it was noticed in time and the unit was dragged out
                    into the back garden before any real damage was done.

                    --
                    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

                    Comment

                    • Wolfgang Draxinger

                      #11
                      Re: Access to a ridiculous computer? :-D

                      Randy Howard wrote:
                      On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 05:04:18 -0600, Philip Potter wrote
                      (in article <fll3rj$kh9$1@a ioe.org>):
                      >
                      >PS: FYI, your name is still screwed in my newsreader.
                      >
                      Get a better one.
                      A better what? Newsreader? Tomas (or his Newsreader) is violating
                      NNTP message standard, by using non verbatim 7-bit ASCII
                      characters in the name field. There is of course a way to put
                      extended characters in there, by using a specially encoded
                      format. However some Newsreaders need to have this enabled
                      explicitly, and some can't encode in that way.

                      Tomas uses Xnews, which can decode encoded NNTP headers, but
                      can't encode. So he has to provide the encoded field himself or
                      use a different Newsreader or don't use extended characters in
                      Header fields.

                      Wolfgang Draxinger
                      --
                      E-Mail address works, Jabber: hexarith@jabber .org, ICQ: 134682867

                      Comment

                      • Philip Potter

                        #12
                        Re: [OT] Too much current

                        "Tomï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½" wrote:
                        Philip Potter <pgp@doc.ic.ac. ukwrote in comp.lang.c:
                        >
                        >Don't Do That. At least in the UK, 4kW through one plug is over 17A of
                        >current (230V voltage), and you shouldn't ever try to draw more than
                        >13A through a plug. Many house fires have been started in this way.
                        >
                        (I find the ambiguous spelling of "lead" irritating so I'm going to
                        replace it with "led" or "leed" where applicable)
                        >
                        The extension leed has four sockets, each of which leed to a common 13 A
                        fuse.
                        >
                        I should be able to plug whatever I want in wherever I want... worst case
                        scenario being a blown fuse.
                        [snip]
                        Anyway, a question I'd like to ask: Should an actual plug or leed
                        ever become hot? Because the plastic of the plug from the extension leed
                        going into the wall was pretty hot, as was the leed.
                        >
                        I'm an electronic engineer myself but I still wouldn't have batted an
                        eyelid about plugging things in willy-nilly, (even into a mutli-adapter),
                        because the worst thing that should happen is a blown fuse.
                        I am not an expert by any means, but I was told at school many, many
                        times never to overload a socket. The only conclusion I can come to is
                        that although the fuse *should* protect the plug and cable, if that fuse
                        doesn't work as it should then you've got a problem. Fuses are blunt
                        devices - they don't trigger immediately and they don't trigger at
                        exactly 13A. And, too often, the wrong fuse gets fitted to a plug.
                        Making a fuse a single point of failure is probably not a good plan.

                        I would take a hot cable as being a significant warning sign. If the
                        cable was hot, I'd say it was carrying more current than it should.

                        But again, I'm not an electrician.
                        I bought a smoke alarm along with the heaters though, just in case,
                        and I have it mounted right above them. I've got smoke alarms on the
                        ceilings of the rooms in my house, but I've also got ones mounted
                        specifically above high-risk devices (my washing machine, dryer, and the
                        heaters). I've only ever had one fire in my house and it was in a washing
                        machine; thankfully it was noticed in time and the unit was dragged out
                        into the back garden before any real damage was done.
                        Ouch!

                        Comment

                        • Mark McIntyre

                          #13
                          Re: [OT] Too much current

                          Philip Potter wrote:
                          (replying to tom who wrote)
                          >>
                          >I should be able to plug whatever I want in wherever I want... worst
                          >case scenario being a blown fuse.
                          The epitaph of many a dead householder.
                          Making a fuse a single point of failure is probably not a good plan.
                          Correct. But offtopic.
                          I would take a hot cable as being a significant warning sign. If the
                          cable was hot, I'd say it was carrying more current than it should.
                          Also correct, and also offtopic.

                          --
                          Mark McIntyre

                          CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
                          CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt >

                          Comment

                          • Al Balmer

                            #14
                            Re: [OT] Too much current

                            On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:23:49 +0000, Philip Potter <pgp@doc.ic.ac. uk>
                            wrote:
                            >I am not an expert by any means, but I was told at school many, many
                            >times never to overload a socket. The only conclusion I can come to is
                            >that although the fuse *should* protect the plug and cable, if that fuse
                            doesn't work as it should then you've got a problem.
                            The fuse is intended to protect the house wiring, and is sized
                            accordingly. It won't stop an overloaded extension cord from
                            overheating itself and whatever it comes in contact with.

                            --
                            Al Balmer
                            Sun City, AZ

                            Comment

                            • Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

                              #15
                              Re: [OT] Too much current

                              Al Balmer <albalmer@att.n etwrote in comp.lang.c:
                              The fuse is intended to protect the house wiring, and is sized
                              accordingly. It won't stop an overloaded extension cord from
                              overheating itself and whatever it comes in contact with.

                              If the fuse was intended to protect the house wiring rather than the
                              appliance's wiring, then it would make more sense to have fuses in our
                              sockets rather than in our plugs.

                              The max rating for the sockets is 13 A, and it's also 13 A for the plugs.

                              If the extension lead overheats when less than 13 A goes through it, then
                              it should be rated as maybe an 8 A extension lead, and accordingly have
                              an 8 A fuse in its plug.

                              Anyway I've come to conclusion that either:
                              a) The heaters are 1.5 kW instead of 2 kW.
                              or
                              b) The fuse is allowing 13 A to pass.

                              I'll look into it.

                              --
                              Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

                              Comment

                              Working...