You don't really need IRQs for most ISA boards. OPL3/Adlib sound cards don't need one, MIDI doesn't, joystick port doesn't. I saw various I/O boards that don't need IRQ. Soundblaster does, but I don't know for what purpose. Maybe someone here can explain?
Coincidentally I'm currently working on a Sound Blaster driver for some DOS homebrew, so here's quick rundown of how an SB is programmed and what its resources do:
Base Address: This is the beginning of the IO port range you use to program the card, commonly it's 0x220, but can be configured with jumpers (or software on later cards). You can add offsets to this address to access different functionality of the card, such as the OPL chip or the Mixer chip.
IRQ: The interrupt number that will be fired when the soundcard finishes playback of an audio chunk. Early cards usually used 7, later models defaulting to 5. More on this below.
DMA Channel: Which channel of the PC's DMA controller will be supplying audio data to the card. Usually 1 for 8-bit cards, with 5 being used for 16-bit cards.
The general process for playback is as follows:
- Program the DMA controller with the address and size of an audio buffer you'll be using to mix your PCM sound into. This buffer will conventionally be used in 2 halves by the interrupt service routine, a front buffer and backbuffer, similar to what you'd have for double buffered video. The DMA channel should also be put in "auto-init" mode so that the DMA transfer will loop back to the start when it finishes, which allows continuous playback.
- Install an interrupt service routine to write data into the "backbuffer" half of the DMA buffer, which switches back and forth each time an IRQ fires.
- Initialize the DSP chip via its IO port, pick a sample rate (usually around 11khz for most DOS games), then issue a continuous playback command. For this part, you tell the soundcard that your playback buffer is half the size it actually is, which causes the IRQ to fire once in the middle of the buffer, and again at the end of the buffer before looping back to the start. These halfway IRQs allow you to fill the unused half of the buffer while the other half is playing, for smooth gapless playback with no clicks or pops.
This is probably more info than you or anyone actually wanted, but it's a fun topic so I couldn't help myself.
Sound Blasters and compatible cards used IRQ lines because back in the bad old days CPUs were slow, bandwidth was tiny, and buffers were minuscule.
To get responsive/real time audio the card needs to signal to the CPU, not the other way around, and at the time IRQs were the way to do that on ISA busses.
I would imagine that ISA cards that didn't need IRQs either required CPU polling or DMA.
I imagined that the game / audio driver would just send data to the card at regular intervals and that's it. I realize now that the card uses it's own clock that can drift when compared to the system timer and this method would have a buffer underrun/overrun problem.
To be honest there is not much to it, you buy the movement, put it in a case, and put the hands on it. you can get everything from aliexpress. it's easier and often cheaper to just buy a normal watch if you need one.
The suburb move is sort of a nouveau-riche/upper middle class thing.
It's like that here in Canada too. Poor people rent apartments in places with easy access to transit, and if they "make it" then the next step is to buy a house in a bedroom community where if you want to do literally anything you need to pile into the car, but hey at least your kids have a yard to play in.
The next step up is being able to afford either a detached home in a upscale desirable neighbourhood, or a nice condo downtown in Toronto/Vancouver, and then again the next step after that is giant mansions outside the city centres.
80% of Canada's population lives along the Windsor-Quebec City corridor and the bulk of that is in suburbs.
Should not, true, but in the case of many websites the reality is that allowing JS means you lost your privacy. Just like one cannot allow webgl and canvas by default any longer.
Thanks to all the web devs who helped creating this web dystopia.
Yes, my point is that this does not mean it is an "opt in checkbox". I appreciate that it allows people to be nasty, it just isn't a "please be nasty" toggle.
The person I have responded wrote the "should have" construction without giving any proofs why is it so. Maybe in the world of pink ponies everyone should have a free bread on the breakfast, but some things might be unintuitive in the our one.
You can't go out in public naked and just ask everyone to look away. If you want someone you don't trust to run unvetted general purpose code on your machine you have to accept that you are trading away some privacy. You can sandbox them (wear cloths) but that doesn't give you strict privacy.
I do wear clothes (all JS code runs in a sandbox).
This is a bit like saying "you should lock the door to your house" and therefore refusing to prosecute someone who steals from a house with a broken window frame. I did lock my door, and it's still a crime regardless!
100% we should ensure that Browser's restrict fingerprinting as much as posible. I certainly set my Firefox to have many inconviniencies to reduce the fingerprint. I am just saying this is an engineering compromise and the tradeoff will be different for different people. Wishing we can have our cake and eat it dosn't help; you do have to choose between privacy and functionality.
When I go to https://noscriptfingerprint.com/ all I see is a blank page. My browser is pretty locked down in other ways which probably helps, but I'm still taking that as a good sign.
>Oh yeah, did anyone mention how long it takes to integrate a new system onto the F-35? Fracking years. All of which has to be done by LM, forever. Because the F-35 is not a jet, it's a Master Contract.
This is the new reality of military procurement and has been for years. Integrated Logistical Support contracts are preferred by senior leadership for lots of reasons that won't fit into an HN comment box, but the wave tops are that it's wastefully inefficient to have uniformed aerospace engineers, logisticians, project managers, etc. doing R&D work. Private industry does it faster, better, cheaper, and pays bigger salaries with better lifestyles which means they can attract better talent.
I've been an aerospace engineer both in-uniform and out, and I can assure you that uniformed service members (and their families!) sacrifice a lot that's hard to quantify and not always immediately apparent. It's not 1950 any more; the best and brightest mostly don't want to touch government with a 10 foot pole. There's more money and prestige elsewhere, in the private sector.
It's not just that uniformed (or DoD) engineers have no access, the subsystem vendor (e.g. Raytheon) also get no access. LM is incredibly obstructionist, even compared to the bastards at Boeing.
This cluster** has led directly to initiatives for open (Govt open) architectures and vendor agnostic interfaces for talking between vehicles and components, and between component, between jets and drones and C2 etc. That has a long way to go too, but at least we've broken with the idea that it can be a closed system.
I'm familiar with the problems of service careers. There is a lot that could be done to improve that, but that's a different discussion. I think it's extra important now that we have jet engineers who know about AI in the aviation context.
Oh, I know all about LM. I used to work on the Hercules when I was in the Air Force. Experimental flight permits, mods, block upgrades, the works. Greatest aircraft in history, if you ask me, but I digress.
Ultimately the F-35 remains Lockheed's intellectual property, which is what drives all this. They want to sell it to other countries, which they can't do if the USAF owns the IP.
>Sam Altman is always “OMG, the new version of ChatGPT is so scary and dangerous”, but then releases it anyway
One of the many reasons nobody should give Scam Altman their money. It's continually infuriating that this serial grifter is in such a position of power.
Okay I know we're not supposed to complain about downvotes but c'mon it's actually delicious, doesn't taste like fish, and just adds umami. Don't knock it until you try it!
I'm just down voting a meaningless comment. 1T fish sauce + an unknown amount of tomato sauce could taste like anything from fish sauce to tomato sauce.
My apologies. My comment was intended for people who know how to cook, for whom "put about a tablespoon of fish sauce into your tomato sauce for pasta" would not be meaningless.
I read your entire comment, thanks. But you didn't write anything about trying it.
Also, why not reflect on the nature of fish sauce and the nature of tomato sauce? Does that give you any ideas about what ratio might be edible? Any constraints at all on what might be worth trying?
Trying it or not (I have) doesn't make OP's comment any more meaningful or less worthy of a downvote.
The fact that you have to focus on moving the conversation away from the the point and are trying to move the conversation towards incorrect assumptions and "the nature of tomato sauce" is telling.
I didn’t downvote you but fish sauce does taste strongly like rancid fish to some people, even in trace quantities. Nothing about that flavor profile is delicious. There is nothing stealthy about it either if you are one of those people; you can immediately detect that disgusting note on the first bite.
I love anchovies and use a lot of them in many of the dishes I cook (including tomato sauce). Fish sauce ruins everything it touches for me. It isn’t lack of exposure either; I lived on Vietnamese home-cooking for many years. I eat a lot of weird and pungent things but I have no context for why anyone would want to put that fish sauce in their food. Also, some types of fish sauce from around the world don’t have this effect for whatever reason.
I’m pretty sure from observation that it is gene-linked thing, like the cilantro sensitivity. While rare, even some Vietnamese people seem to fall into this set and it is part of their cuisine.
reply