I question the idea that homebrew CPUs on FPGAs are the future of desktop computing. Core IP availability aside, FPGAs are very expensive.
Also, FPGAs are typically configured with an HDL, which can be likened more to C than assembler.
Also, FPGAs are typically configured with an HDL, which can be likened more to C than assembler.
Yes currently, but price depends on demand. On the other side, if FPGAs remain expensive then Assembler could become even more important to put as much code as possible into an fpga.
> can be likened more to C than assembler.
For that reason I mentioned the word Assembler in quotes. Btw VHDL is much more like Ada than C while Verilog is different from both.
It might change in the future though? I remember some years ago, the possibility of nanotube based chips were being touted, offering FPGA like programmability and speeds greater than a dedicated chip. I haven't heard of it since.
Aside from similar to some programming language, HDL is pretty interesting to learn in its own right. (Although I disagree that it's like C. It's more like a declarative language for circuits, though it's true that you can stick imperative-like code in there. But treating it like C is a recipe for problems.)
Also, most microcontroller companies provide all the specs you need to roll your own end-to-end software for the device. Aside from specifying the machine language (so you can write your own compiler), they also have app notes for programming the onboard flash via JTAG or another interface. With programmable logic, it seems like the only parts that don't require the vendor's own programmer and synthesis software are legacy SPLDs like 22v10s.
I know, but a DE0-nano has only 20k LE's, and runs at 50MHz. You'd probably be limited to simulations of an Intel 8008 or thereabouts.