Reverse-engineering a carry-lookahead adder in the Pentium

Does anyone else feel sad that you&#x27;ll never get to design silicon at this kind of low level? I hope that someday nanotech reaches a point where I can design and print 1 u-meter process chips or something.<p>(I guess I could always buy hundreds of thousands of transistors and start soldering...)

If anyone is interested in adder taxonomy and why one might select one architecture over another in VLSI I can highly recommend this slide deck.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;pages.hmc.edu&#x2F;harris&#x2F;cmosvlsi&#x2F;4e&#x2F;lect&#x2F;lect17.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;pages.hmc.edu&#x2F;harris&#x2F;cmosvlsi&#x2F;4e&#x2F;lect&#x2F;lect17.pdf</a><p>In particular slides 36 and 37

Author here if anyone has questions about the obscure details of Kogge-Stone adders :-)

&gt; In the TMS 1000, the program counter steps through the program pseudo-randomly rather than sequentially. The program is shuffled appropriately in the ROM to counteract the sequence, so the program executes as expected and a few transistors are saved.<p>Two wrongs make a right.