lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Parallax Propeller

message: I made some changes so hopefully the article now looks less like an advertisement. Mahjongg 16:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is this really zero or is it dictated by the current state of the round-robin mechanism? Similarly is response entirely predictable or is it subject to a small abount of jitter depending on the timing relationship between the round-robin scanner and the external signal? MarkMLl (talk) 11:27, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no round-robin mechanism needed, or used, as the propeller can use one of it's "waiting" instructions, which only continue when a specific pattern is available on the I/O port, the WAITPEQ instruction, or the WAITPNE instruction, so yes, it works without any latency variations. Mahjongg (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interrupt simulation latency 

message: Parallax was at MakerFaire again, and I asked them point-blank about the Propeller 2's ship date.  They expect it to be some time this summer, and confirmed a significant increase in I/O pins.  I am so looking forward to getting a data sheet so I can add it to this article... Breakpoint (talk) 22:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propeller2 

message: Spin isn't a multitasking language and doesn't have threads.  You can just run multiple single-threaded instances of it in separate cogs.  Also, assembly can't be inserted inline into spin.  I'm not editing the page now because I'm busy and I don't have the time to find references in the Propeller Manual right now.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Electrodude512 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Built in SPIN byte code interpreter 

message: "If two languages were to meet in a bar – Fortran and BASIC – nine months later one would find Spin." ... is simply wrong.
SPIN ignores identifiers' case and has no higher data structures like a triassic integer+strings only BASIC and indentation is relevant like in PYTHON.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C0:5F01:A360:10D3:4C3C:D01:4AAB (talk) 04:34, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  There's no FORTRAN in SPIN! 

message: In the “other programming language“ submenu, in the “the forth” area there is language that implies that commercial software cant be open source, it can and often is, I recommend that (if the idea is to provide additional information of free (civil rights context) software that they replace the language and the link for “open source” with the language “free software” and the link for the free software page on Wikipedia. That is if there are variants of the Forth language that are in fact free software like the language now on the page timidly suggests. Hassell (talk) 03:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with wording of language in “The Forth” area of “other software“ submenu
Talk:Iroquois Falls Storm

message: So I don’t use this part of the site often so I don’t know the basics of how the talk section works so sorry if doesn’t look right but I don’t think anyone will fix this but this team has just been relocated from Cochrane to nearby Iroquois Falls and both this article and related articles with this team need to be updated and the new team will need a new article as the team has a new name branding and colours. There are some articles from the team on there website I can link the sites if you can’t find them. 208.96.99.248 (talk) 22:55, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing This and Other Articles
Talk:Pygoscelis

message: I'm moving this cryptic citation from being hidden on the article page to here in case someone wants to track it down and see if its relevent: Cladistics22:412
--Kevmin (talk) 03:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cryptic citation 

message: It means "rump-tailed". See the Century dictionary. And pygo-. Scelis means 'leg'. 217.43.43.170 (talk) 10:17, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Pygoscelis
Talk:Airball (video game)

message: Seriously guys.  Airball the basketball shot should not use this page as it's only description.  There should be a simple link "for 'airball' the basketball shot, [click here|airball(basketball)]" that has that description on it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.251.81 (talk) 02:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Banded penguin

message: I was thinking about adding some information to this page regarding vocalizations of the different banded penguin species. Here are some references I have found regarding the subject. Please let me know if anyone has any comments or suggestions :) HayleyMercer (talk) 23:06, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What is this? I have tried to wikilink it. There are no search results for it on this wiki. Snowman (talk) 09:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  C Andean coast
Talk:GNU Mach

message: How is it possible that GNU Mach is available under the GPL, when Mach 3 requires a Unix license from AT&T or successor?  Or was it derived from what appear to be public domain portions?  -- Beland (talk) 15:03, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Replied on your talk page. For anyone else, the source you are pointing to is talking about a complete operating system. The Unix source license is for the non-kernel parts of the system. The Unix source license isn't for the Mach kernel itself. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 19:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  License 

message: Why is it based on 3? Or 4 as links say. Wasn't 2.5 the last good one? 86.138.191.114 (talk) 10:05, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Based on? 

message: Is GNU Mach used by somebody for something? Why is there an article on the topic? Seems completely irrelevant.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.44.239 (talk) 22:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevance of the article 

message: I propose this article be merged to the GNU Hurd article. AadaamS (talk) 13:47, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge this article to GNU Hurd 

message: Would it be worth it to add a section to this article comparing GNU Mach with other implementations of the mach kernel, such as Apple's  mach implementation in XNU? Or would that work better as a separate article called "Comparison of mach implementations" or something? Or are the various mach implementations so different from one another that comparing them would make no sense? Cooljeanius (talk) (contribs) 01:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison with other implementations of mach
Talk:L3 microkernel

message: The section about L3 in the L4 microkernel family page, L4 microkernel family#L3 may be a reasonable target for merging. This would affect the Jochen Liedtke page, though. Rootmoose (talk) 09:11, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, this page should be merged with L4. L3 is only noteworthy as the predecessor of L4. heiser (talk) 06:11, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with L4 microkernel family page? 

message: The notoriety tag has just been added to the page. I support removing it and redirecting to the respective section of the L4 page.
L3 is historically significant as L4's predecessor, and the L4 page states that clearly. In addition, the present L3 page is close to content-free, and what is there is at least partially wrong: L3 isn't a microkernel in the (now widely accepted) definition as a minimal kernel [Liedtke'95]. heiser (talk) 12:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notoriety
Talk:Spring (operating system)

message: Why has this article been renamed "Sun Spring"? No-one calls Spring that: I checked several hundred Google search results for "Sun Spring", and found only a handful of results that even have anything to do with operating systems, and those are for phrases like "Sun's Spring" and "... from Sun (Spring, Hibernate, ...". People refer to "Spring", "the Spring project", "Sun's Spring" etc., never "Sun Spring" -- not even Sun calls it that. -- 82.36.30.34 02:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm. Looking at the edit history, I see that user  moved it from "Spring (operating system)" to the current name back in June. See User talk:Rwwww#Why move .22Trusted Solaris.22 to .22Sun Trusted Solaris.22 .3F for a related discussion. Note that there are no other operating systems named "Spring" AFAIK, and that Spring was a research project, not a commercial product. So I agree with  that the previous title was better. I've left a message on User talk:Rwwww. What do other editors think? CWC 10:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely should be restored back to "just "Spring (operating system)" -- no surprise here, I imagine, since I was the one that asked that "Sun Trusted Solaris" be moved back to "Trusted Solaris", and Rwwww was good enough to do so.--NapoliRoma 18:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And now Rwwww has moved this article back to "Spring (operating system)". Thanks, Rwwww. Cheers, CWC 01:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: The overview box of the article gives "Motorola 68000 series" as the supported platform. All papers, however, mentions early SPARC systems (e.g. SparcStation 2) only, which I would expect from a research OS that was created in the early '90s. 2A02:810D:82BF:CB50:F10F:2DE2:39FC:E6E4 (talk) 07:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  SPARC, not 68000?
Talk:LM.C (Japanese band)

message: This article shouldn't be deleted. LM.C have worked hard to get from Miyavi's support band to their own band, they deserve to have a page on them, at least. There might not be a lot of information on them. But I'm working on it. --Soushisouai 07:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is, having a page on Wikipedia has nothing to do with deserving it, and everything to do with notability guidelines.  If you can find adequate sources for a notability claim, go ahead and flesh out the article.  Good editing!  Coren 02:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

text: But LM.C fits atleast two if not more standards on there. They have singles and mini albums. I put them up and everything. I don't really know how to do this, so I won't be too disappointed if they delete it. But it won't stop me from trying to get a page for them. ha. Thanks. :3 Soushisouai 08:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now, indeed, it does.  Sufficiently, at least, not not deserve a speedy tag.  Good work.  Coren 03:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section deletion 

message: There has been no mention, but the article is written in a way that promotes and hypes the band, which defeat the standard guidelines set out by Wikipedia to maintain neutrality for each article; articles should be written with a neutral point of view. I have done some edits to correct this/make the article sound less promotional. Please re-edit/undo if this is not achieved. Lpjz290 (talk) 00:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality rewrite
Talk:Peruvian booby

message: * Link for Reference 2. http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/67/5/940.full.pdf+html
* Clicking Peruvian booby (on the internet bird collection) shows me 403 forbidden.
http://www.hbw.com/ibc/species/peruvian-booby-sula-variegata
Anonymouscontributer (talk) 22:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested edits 
Talk:IBM 801

message: System 801 Principles of Operation, Version 2 describes a byte-addressable machine with 16 24-bit GPRs and a mix of 16-bit and 32-bit instructions.
Other papers speak of a machine with 32 32-bit GPRs and 32-bit instructions.
ROMP is described by IBM as "a single-chip derivative of the 801 processor project of IBM Research"; it started out with 16 24-bit registers, went to 16 32-bits registers, and had multiple instruction lengths.
So are there any references for:
#the different versions of the 801 instruction set;
#the implementations of those versions of the instruction set, whether in the form of simulators or actual hardware? Guy Harris (talk) 01:46, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Microprocessors: A Programmer's View (1990) by Robert B.K. Dewar and Matthew Smosna says on pp 263264 that there were two versions of the 801: the original with 16 24-bit GPRs and 16- and 32-bit instructions, and a later one with 32 32-bit GPRs and 32-bit instructions. They say in later chapter that the ROMP was based on the original version of the 801. IIRC, the IBM J. Res. & Dev. paper "Evolution of RISC Technology at IBM" (IIRC, this is the title), which is available for free from the IEEE Xplore Digital Library, also says that there were two versions of the 801, but it doesn't give nearly as much detail as Dewar and Smosna. 99Electrons (talk) 22:25, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the 801 ISA and of implementations of it 

message: In Computer Wars: How the West Can Win in a Post-IBM World on p. 49, IBM is said to have tried to commercialize the 801 as something that could emulate and outperform various IBM minicomputers and low-end S/370s. The book goes on to say it was eventually cancelled because emulation imposed too great a performance penalty for it to work. Is the project described in this book (code-named Fort Knox) related to the IBM 9370 low-end S/370 mainframes? (IBM says the 9370 uses some sort of 801-derived processor to emulate the S/370 architecture). 99Electrons (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did IBM try to commercialize the 801?
Talk:Intel 4040

message: OK, there's some weirdness going on here, in terms of both missing and contradictory information.
1/ The chip is listed as having both "12 bit", "13 bit" and "8 kilobyte" address ranges. For a chip with a 4-bit word length / data bus width, that latter one is equal to 14 bits, not 13, as 8192 bytes = 16384 nibbles. So, which is it? If it's 12-bit like the 4004, then that's only a total of 2KB address space (4k words). 13-bit would be 4KB / 8k-nibble. 14-bit seems like a realistic possibility, because that would then match the 8008 and maybe explain its rather odd choice of address width.
2/ Is it multiplexed or separate? The much greater number of pins vs the 4004 suggests that, much like the 8080 vs 8008, the data and address buses were partially or wholly demultiplexed in the 4040 (ie instead of issuing a string of 3 nibbles for the address then reading or writing the actual data as a fourth, the address is asserted as a single 12 to 14 bit value, or even two 6 or 7 bit ones, and the data is either then read/written sequentially via four of those pins, or transfers more-or-less simultaneously over 4 separate pins), which would produce a significant speed boost when reading/writing memory or IO devices... as well as avoiding the introduction of additional delays if the address space is actually greater than 12 bits. But there's no explicit mention of it and the extra pins could well be spoken for by other functions not clearly defined in the article.
Even the functional diagram doesn't make it plain; there's no appearance of dedicated address lines anywhere in the image, but neither are the data lines marked as "address/data" as would be the case for the 4004, 8008, 8085, 8086, 8088 etc... 146.199.0.170 (talk) 13:46, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Addressing?!

message: Hi,
I am currently in the possession of a (now EXTREMELY rare) C4040 CPU and I would like to contribute by uploading a home-made picture of it.
Unfortunately the legal pages look like a minefield. Can anyone help me out here?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiederikH (talk • contribs) 19:21, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uploading new photograph? 

message: It looks like the C4040 is made out of ceramic, but not the D4040, right? 
--PantheraLeo1359531 (talk) 11:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intel D4040 and ceramic?
Talk:Copper interconnects

message: What would you term or call a copper based metal and also a aluminium based metal  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.168.222.245 (talk) 10:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  what would you term 

message: The article's title is incorrect. It should be titled "Copper-based interconnect" or something similar as it is the interconnect that is copper-based, not the die or the package. Rilak (talk) 06:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong title
Talk:Clown walk

message: "Some Crip kiddies thought it would be cool to tap dance to their T-Pain and Akon songs, in order to show off their mad talents, since they can't break dance."-RemovedDogPHman 22:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed a stupid commentation 

message: Before adding a link please state how it meets Wikipedia's external links guidelines. Thanks. --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 15:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links
Talk:Zilog Z8000

message: So, the Z8001 has 7-bit segment registers that extend RAM out to 8MB (64KB per segment x 128 segments...).
And Pole Position uses Z8002s with a "smaller" memory range (how small?).
But... what does the Z8000 itself manage? As it's 16 bit, did the original authour thus imply 64KB? (Not really very much for a 16-bit class CPU) ... Or does it inherently have SOME ability to use multiple segments... just not 128 of them? 193.63.174.211 (talk) 16:42, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Normal" memory address range? 

message: It would be nice to add an example subroutine, such as the strtolower() example used for some of the other microprocessors (e.g., 6502, 80386, 68000, etc.). — Loadmaster (talk) 17:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example code 

message: 24 bit allows access to 16 mega-words of address space, so at least 16 MiB. Why does the text only say 8MB? 91.89.172.255 (talk) 15:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "24-bit external address bus to allow it to access up to 8 megabytes of memory" 

message: I don't quite get what is the connection between this text from article "But the Z8000's launch date placed it between the 16-bit Intel 8086 (April 1978), and the Motorola 68000 (September 1979), the latter of which had a 32-bit instruction set architecture and was roughly twice as fast" and the quote from Federico Faggin.
So what if it was launched between i8086 and MC68000?
IBM PC was launched in 1981 with a very short design cycle - so all processors were available for IBM, irrespective of their release date.89.136.36.50 (talk) 19:46, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  IBM PC reasons
Talk:Tukwila (processor)

message: Tukwila (code name for Itanium 9300) was finally released after a three year delay on February 8, 2010. This page contains some very old data which has been replicated elsewhere so it might make more sense to delete this article then redirect "Tukwilla_(processor)" and "Itanium 9300" to the article "Itanium".
To non-technical article moderators, we have done this once before by removing the article "Itanium2" then redirecting it to "Itanium". Neilrieck (talk) 13:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Zilog Z80000

message: My recollection was that the z80k project was cancelled along with the ZIlog Z8070 floating point chip in August 1984.
Kevink707 (talk) 22:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was it ever finished? 

message: It has instructions like INDEXL RR4,RR6,#10,#20,#100 like the VAX and it's instructions and registers look more similar to the NEC V60 or Motorola 68k than to the 386. It also has 16 general-purpose registers (instead of 8 semi-general registers like x86) and is not accumulator-oriented like the x86 architecture. What is the article comparing to the 386? Certainly not CPU architecture. Is it speed? Time period? Intended market?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.205.116.100 (talk) 22:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Equivalent" to 386?
Talk:Hitachi HD64180

message: Isn't it a microcontroller?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.81.137.4 (talk) 19:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on how it's used whether you could call it a microcontroller, but when this was produced it was considered and used as a CPU.--KJRehberg (talk) 17:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Microcontroller?
Talk:ANTIC

message: The Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a instruction manual. A massive expansion to this article has added considering instruction and reference manual content, which simply doesn't belong here - and there are numerous good sources on the 'net that already cover this material. Unless someone has a very good reason that this information needs to be archived here, I will attempt to dramatically shorten it in the new future. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:32, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing most of this article 

message: If one were to consider the CTIA/GTIA a glue chip for the Antic (which for the sake of this idea it is), then under the guidance of the CPU, computed values by the ANTIC could be read back into memory, via Player/Missile/Playground collision registers. Not only can they be read back in, but true screen position output could be determined by raster scanning a 1 pixel missile over the whole of the background, like slow scanning camera. Is this not correct enough to call it Turing complete, since the 65C02 could (acting as yet more glue) instruct a change back to the DLI to modify the output observed?  I know this is REALLY stretching what acts as glue, but saying there is no way to read output is wrong... it just can't do it on it's own. AE7EC (talk) 08:21, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turing Complete? 

message: This article reads like a technical datasheet or a programming manual. It should provide a broad overview of what the chip does and where it was used. There doesn't need to be page after page of detailed explanations of what every single bit in every register does.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.5.115.8 (talk) 08:53, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Encyclopaedia, not a datasheet
Talk:Motorola MC14500B

message: Should we really have sentences saying it is "still available on the aftermarket" just because somebody listed one on ebay?
Mr. Shoeless (talk) 02:23, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nope! I'm removing that now, one moment. --moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 05:45, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Talk:Triethylaluminium

message: "It also can be used as a rocket fuel, but has not been for any production vehicle."
I dispute that T. can be used as a rocket fuel. One of the fundamental Properties of a rocket fuel is, that it reacts with an oxidizer to a gas. T. reacts in a large part to a solid, aluminum oxide. Solids can not expand in a nozzle and they clog feed lines. Therefore T. would be a very bad rocket fuel. The sentence is misleading at least. T. is no more a rocket fuel than wood or a large number of other substances that can be ignited. If there is no objection, I will remove it in a week. --92.231.44.7 (talk) 15:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the sentence that indicated the use as a fuel.  it is used as an ignitor or can be.--Smokefoot (talk) 15:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The part with the igniter is true. It's usually mixed with Triethylborane. Both are hypergolic (react without ignition) with liquid oxigen, but Triethylborane reacts slowly and as mentioned before Triethylaluminium reacts to solid aluminum oxide. So basically, you use Triethylaluminium to produce enough heat so that Triethylborane can ignite the engine faster. The downside is of course, that you have to get the oxide out of the engine. If something gets clogged, disaster ensues.--92.230.223.65 (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use as rocket fuel 