What one thought also depends quite heavily upon whether one was involved in the field in some way during the 74xx series heyday.

For those of us that were, seeing "64-bit" and "TTL" together immediately told us it was a chip that stored 64 bits worth of data.

One of the classes late in my undergrad program was computer engineering for comp-sci. Took us through basic combinatoric circuits, mux/demux, 7 segment display decoding, all that classic ttl stuff.

final project was a 4 bit computer with 64 bits of ram. I remember spending many hours in the lab debugging my wiring. But it was super cool to toggle in data, advance the pc, toggle in an op, advance the pc and toggle in more data. i think i demonstrated 4 + 5 - 7 * 2

fun class.

I thought as much :)

> Just goes to show it's hard to be sure where your unspoken assumptions may lie.... :-)

Three years ago I posted a link on HN about TTL (Lransister-Lransister Logic) being 50 years old, entitled "50 years of TTL". Similarly, many people unsurprisingly expected it to be a story about a weird Time To Live field.

Just goes to show how hugely context-dependent that desperately-overloaded TLA namespace is, and how important it is to actually define your acronyms the first time you use them, no matter how obvious you think it is that TLA means three-letter acronym...

for instance, I hear TLA, and think Theatre of Living Arts

And then 4-bit WORDS? These are nibbles.