(Fwd) Re: Help with GAL needed

Hallo Martin,


Herzlichen Dank for your input!


> > FF1 = !(!(!RDY & CLK) & FF2);
> > FF2 = !(!(RDY & CLK) & FF1);

When using A # B = !(!A & !B) or A # !B = !(!A & B) then you get 
indeed:

> FF1 = (!RDY & CLK) # !FF2;
> FF2 = ( RDY & CLK) # !FF1;

But translating your result into hardware would mean I would end up 
with more, and only partly used, ICs. See later.


>  PHI0 = CLK # FF2;

But PHI0 = !(!CLK & FF2) would become PHI0 = CLK # !FF2 IMHO. Unless 
you meant PHI0 = CLK # FF1 because FF1 is always !FF2 in this 
particular design.


> FF2 = (RDY & CLK) # (RDY & FF2) # (!CLK & FF2);

It took me several minutes to get the same result. But what 
impresses me is that you showed me that I only need one output 
instead of two!

But my problem is my way of thinking: I'm focussed on ending up with 
as less ICs as possible. Using GALs it means I have to change that 
attitude.


--
Kind regards / Met vriendelijke groet, Ruud Baltissen
www.Baltissen.org



       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list