30299Re: [midatlanticretro] More info on the latest TV prop deal -- show identified!
- Apr 24, 2013The wikipedia entry explains the reference .The writers must be geeks. I remembered from somewhere. I think it was an old BYTE article.
On Apr 24, 2013, at 8:15 AM, "Wesley Furr" <mailto:wesley%40megley.com> wrote:
> "As a note, the series' unusual name is derived from a termfor a computing
> code specifically designed to destroy a machine'sCPU."
>bode well in my
> Really? Never heard of such a thing! That alone doesn't
> mind... Unless of course there actually was at somepoint in history a
> machine that could be physically damaged by codealone...in which case, I
> sit corrected.As others have noted, that description is incorrect, which makes me
maybe a little less enthused about the show. Good chance their
copywriters aren't as up on the lingo, though. An HCF opcode was
one that, intentionally or otherwise, trapped a processor in a
tight loop that was unrecoverable except by reset. If it was an
intentional opcode, it was usually for e.g. factory testing (just
incrementing the PC forever or something else with a diagnostic
purpose). If it was unintentional, as was the case with a few
early micros that used a PLA-based state machine instead of ROM
microcode, it was just a not-very-programmed area of the PLA that
had unexpected results.
Either way, it generally never resulted in the destruction of
anything unless there was some peripheral on the board (or off it)
that reacted poorly to random data writes. That definitely did
happen on occasion, but it was rare.
Seeing the phrase, though, does make me optimistic, however they
might have treated it in the promo copy.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>