Stack is pondering complexity, without calling it so, and in there:
Chuck Moore's efforts are misguided as I see it, by oversimplifying the CPU to the point where it's almost useless. Modern multicore systems are misguided, as I see it, by having the cores be giant and overpowered. And no one is building anything in-between - I think people are completely at a loss as to how to build a massively parallel system that works.
gemini://gemini.ctrl-c.club/~stack/gemlog/2023-03-04.containment.gmi
Assuming that Chuck Moore's efforts point to the GA-144[a], I do agree.
There is a system in between, the Parallax P8X32A Propeller[b,c].
I tried the first incarnation of this chip. I do like a few things. It featured 8 cores, each had access to all external pins. Each had a set of clock/counter registers. There were no interrupts --- one core would be dedicated to react to a specific event (edge on a pin). The assembly language I found nice. Someone even built a Forth for it. However, the software to assemble code was buried behind a proprietary software tool box, so I abandonded it at some point.
It seems that the second incarnation does feature Forth and Assembly language, and open source tools, but I haven't checked for quite some time.
There was a project to assemble 3 parallax chips into a parallel processing unit, called "The Hive"[d]). I even built one, but gave it away for someone else to tinker.
However, I do completely agree with ~stack: Systems like arduino, where the postulated simplicity of the tool box is the biggest marketing pitch, are a lost opportunity. I have talked to several youngsters during presentations of Forth stuff. I do believe, that some folks to understand the lowly bitly tech are definitely needed. And if that stuff strikes your fancy, go for it.
On the other hand, not everyone needs to really understand a piece of technology in order to use it. Even old cars are an example for that.
Another example of nosimpleanswer, unfortunately.
Cheers,
~ew
[b] wikipedia on Parallax Propeller