In calculator terms, an emulator would use the original microcode whereas a simulator would be a recreation of the behaviour in a high level language. Naturally, the emulator would use more CPU, but the simulator might have slightly different quirks or even missing or extra features.

The first modules were being developed at the same time the calculator was, and they needed the emulator to test the electronics and make sure the timings and the various signals were going to work together between the calculator and the modules to make sure they had not overlooked something before going to production, especially because of custom ICs. More of this could be done in software today, but this was in the late 1970's.

_________________
http://WilsonMinesCo.com/ lots of 6502 resources
The "second front page" is http://wilsonminesco.com/links.html .
What's an additional VIA among friends, anyhow?

Ah, you're talking about a hardware emulator. Sorry. My statements were meant to compare two different types of after-the-fact software which is often written.

To be honest, I do find these pedantic interludes to be an overall negative: they break up the existing conversation, and don't make a significant improvement to communication. But how much worse when they are wrong!

Let's just have a sticky post somewhere which goes on at length about saying "compiler" when you mean "assembler" and the difference between "emulator" and "simulator" and never mention them ever again!

I'm now going to misspell Fourth, and capitalise Basic in an odd way.

Cheers
Ed

Sounds like a major consumer of electricity. So it must be emulating a Prius, no?

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!