Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Repeater - "conditional stop"

I could do it, I just don't want to.

Mark Sottilaro

On Saturday, July 26, 2003, at 03:29 PM, Kim Flint wrote:

> At 01:20 PM 7/26/2003, Nic Roozeboom wrote:
>> I imagined it would be only a matter of time before someone would 
>> announce they had hacked OS1.1, and made all sorts of improvements... 
>> such as being able to configure one track as a MIDI looper...
> yes, it's amazing. It can't be that hard. Maybe you could take it on? 
> After all, the Repeater is only a fully custom piece of hardware with 
> its own unique system architecture, and code running straight on the 
> silicon probably without any commercial OS in between. But that just 
> means you gotta know how the hardware works to write the code and 
> there's no OS there to do anything for you. Of course, no 
> documentation is publicly available on the hardware architecture or 
> the programmable logic parts. But heck, with a little patience, a 
> multimeter, logic analyzer, scope, and a year or two of spare time you 
> could probably figure out most of it. Then I guess you would have to 
> decompile the machine code from the roms into undocumented assembler 
> or maybe even C code. I don't know how well decompilers work, but 
> probably the result will be messy and difficult for humans to 
> understand. Hey, but no matter, if you had all the time to figure out 
> the hardware, you've got time to unravel the code too! I bet it would 
> be fun. Once you've got that figured out, then you can go about adding 
> your own features. Careful now! this ain't wimpy windows programming. 
> Real-time embedded coding without a net! Everything you do has the 
> potential to throw something else off, so you need to keep an eye on 
> every clock cycle and all the possible states you could be in. Judging 
> by the kind of bugs they had, there probably aren't many cycles left 
> to play with, but there must be a few here and there. The Electrix 
> guys only went a year over schedule and still had bugs trying to do 
> this, so it can't be that hard really. Oh, by the way, did you catch 
> the time when Electrix mentioned they were out of code space? Ah well, 
> there are probably a few features in there you don't use anyway, so 
> rip 'em out! Assuming you can actually figure out which part of the 
> code they're in...
> Sounds like a great project!
> kim
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Kim Flint                     | Looper's Delight
> kflint@loopers-delight.com    | http://www.loopers-delight.com