Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.arch > #5860

Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more

Path csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:34:58 -0600
Message-ID <4F352B0B.6040108@SPAM.comp-arch.net> (permalink)
Date Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:34:51 -0800
From "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net>
Reply-To andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net
Organization comp-arch.net
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1
MIME-Version 1.0
Newsgroups comp.arch
Subject Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more
References <ggtgp-8D1AEA.03180231012012@netnews.mchsi.com> <jgeu27$9rg$1@dont-email.me> <a7csv8-emn1.ln1@ntp6.tmsw.no> <jgiibd$hkq$1@dont-email.me> <4F2CD4FA.4050004@SPAM.comp-arch.net> <jgjn1i$nqe$1@dont-email.me> <ave009-2ft1.ln1@ntp6.tmsw.no> <jgk6tk$kcb$1@dont-email.me> <j17209-p972.ln1@ntp6.tmsw.no> <jguq3a$rb6$1@dont-email.me> <4F341C7B.9070703@SPAM.comp-arch.net> <jh2f6v$6jg$1@dont-email.me>
In-Reply-To <jh2f6v$6jg$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
Lines 46
X-Usenet-Provider http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace sv3-uv26yl3phrV9WLpNQjqAzifkiR+0EQdhlF312tdBhdvqTfLZF54kkNasXI+Ud68/mh9345Jb+uYLL1g!21xUD/CrsU0YcBWWTEeFp4IqxG1IfBvrhjoDUs0mCSPhfe4Utx7sjXrMC5XP3zI=
X-Complaints-To abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes 4039
Xref x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.arch:5860

Show key headers only | View raw

On 2/9/2012 10:58 PM, Stephen Fuld wrote:
> On 2/9/2012 11:20 AM, Andy (Super) Glew wrote:
>> On 2/8/2012 1:39 PM, Stephen Fuld wrote:
>>> On 2/5/2012 3:50 AM, Terje Mathisen wrote:
>>>> Stephen Fuld wrote:
>>>>> A potential compromise would be to have a two operand instruction
>>>>> format, but with an additional single bit field. Upon decoding, the
>>>>> value of this field is added to the register number (from the
>>>>> instruction istelf, not the contents of the specified register) to
>>>>> give
>>>>> the destination register. Thus, if the value of the field is zero, the
>>>>> instruction is a traditional two operand instruction. If the bit is
>>>>> set,
>>>>> then the destination is one register "higher" than the source and you
>>>>> have preserved the source register's contents.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think this would gain much (but probably not all) of the value of
>>>>> three operand instructions, but with only a single bit instead of
>>>>> however many are needed for a full register specification.

>> But as long as each operand can come from or go to a few places, say 2
>> or 4, they say they can usually schedule without too much wasted motion.
>
> What I proposed was sort of between the two cases above. Each
> instruction that has the bit set can only go to one particular register,
> but that register can be different for each instruction. That is, it
> isn't always R2, but it is always the register at the next higher number
> than the source register number. How does that fit in in terms of
> difficulty?

Assuming that I have clipped the right spot:

What you propose - writing to one register higher than the input - 
causes me to break out in screaming fits, but, based on what my compiler 
guy friends in the past have said, can *PROBABLY* be handled.

However, I can say with rather high probability that there is probably 
no existing code in any compiler to do exactly this, and it is quite 
different from existing register allocation.  Thus, my bet is that doing 
this, while not a theoretical problem, would probably cause the project 
to "slip by a year", or "require cancelling some other planned compiler 
features".  I.e. at the best it is just another tiresome "simple matter 
of programming".  At the worst, there may be a more fundamental problem 
that the compiler guys have glossed over.
But I must admit that, based on what they have said in the past, they 
may be able to handle this.

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-31 03:18 -0600
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-01-31 15:49 +0000
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-31 09:48 -0800
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-01-31 22:20 +0000
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-01-31 10:15 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-03 15:49 +0000
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-03 12:44 -0800
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-01 12:49 +0000
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-01 08:02 -0800
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more sarr.blumson@alum.dartmouth.org - 2012-02-01 16:18 +0000
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-01 16:53 +0000
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-02-01 12:54 -0700
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 21:01 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-02 16:41 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-02 22:47 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-03 14:57 +0000
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-03 10:21 -0800
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-03 10:25 -0800
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-03 12:48 -0800
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-07 12:02 -0500
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-07 13:07 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-07 14:58 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 17:25 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-07 22:42 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brian Drummond <brian@shapes.demon.co.uk> - 2012-02-08 10:31 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-08 14:12 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-08 14:00 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-09 11:45 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-08 13:25 -0600
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 14:21 -0600
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2012-02-02 16:46 -0500
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-03 16:00 +0000
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-03 16:12 +0000
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-03 17:19 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-03 17:25 +0000
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 05:31 -0800
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-01 10:21 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-01 19:16 +0000
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-01 13:34 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-07 17:08 -0500
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-01 14:50 -0500
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 02:07 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> - 2012-02-06 10:50 +0100
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-02 12:30 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 02:03 -0600
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nospam@ab-katrinedal.dk (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2012-02-02 16:15 +0100
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 20:53 -0600
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-02-02 11:16 -0700
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 23:10 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2012-02-02 23:54 -0700
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-12 11:42 -0600
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Chris Gray <cg@GraySage.com> - 2012-02-02 17:41 -0700
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2012-02-03 14:23 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brian Drummond <brian@shapes.demon.co.uk> - 2012-02-04 10:46 +0000
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> - 2012-02-06 08:57 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 13:12 +0000
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-06 14:07 +0000
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Nick Garnett <nickg@calivar.com> - 2012-02-06 14:29 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-02-07 12:06 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Nick Garnett <nickg@calivar.com> - 2012-02-07 17:18 +0000
  Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-02 15:09 -0600
    4- and 5-operand instructions (was: M68k) Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> - 2012-02-02 17:29 -0800
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-03 07:49 +0100
        Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> - 2012-02-03 09:36 -0800
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-03 23:43 -0600
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-03 11:02 -0800
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-04 12:16 -0800
        Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-05 13:59 -0800
          Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-05 14:38 -0800
      Re: 4- and 5-operand instructions (was: M68k) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-06 12:09 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-03 07:42 +0100
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-04 00:14 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-03 22:49 -0800
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-04 10:40 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-04 20:53 +0100
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-04 13:11 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-05 12:50 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-08 13:39 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-09 11:20 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-09 22:58 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-10 09:21 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-10 04:11 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Eric  Northup <digitaleric@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 11:41 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-10 12:12 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-10 06:34 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2012-02-10 11:01 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-10 09:46 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-10 17:20 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-11 18:29 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-11 15:35 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-12 00:47 +0100
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-04 17:56 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-05 02:17 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-05 10:53 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-05 02:20 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nospam@ab-katrinedal.dk (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2012-02-05 11:31 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-05 09:34 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nospam@ab-katrinedal.dk (Niels Jørgen Kruse) - 2012-02-05 17:06 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-05 12:06 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-05 13:04 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-05 16:43 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-06 09:57 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-05 14:10 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-05 13:20 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-06 13:12 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-06 09:51 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-06 15:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-06 17:16 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-05 12:54 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-07 00:05 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 17:26 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-04 04:02 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-04 10:14 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-04 09:12 -0800
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-05 03:15 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-06 13:54 -0500
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-06 20:39 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-08 22:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-08 23:25 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-09 11:30 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-09 17:33 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-10 11:55 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-10 17:18 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-11 22:19 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-12 09:44 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-12 17:22 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-11 22:23 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-11 14:42 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-11 23:37 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-11 18:16 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-12 17:33 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-12 19:16 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-12 12:35 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-12 21:15 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-13 16:32 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-12 08:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-09 15:52 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-02-14 11:23 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-15 13:09 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-10 22:52 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-10 17:32 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-11 09:35 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-12 23:13 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-12 20:32 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-13 08:19 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-13 08:41 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-13 08:36 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-14 09:53 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-14 09:38 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-14 18:54 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-15 04:00 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-15 08:53 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-13 09:49 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-13 12:25 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-13 15:59 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-15 16:29 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-15 08:57 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-15 10:29 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-16 22:06 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2012-02-16 22:18 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-15 12:47 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-21 00:00 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-13 15:17 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-13 16:37 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-14 03:17 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-20 23:36 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 08:53 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-21 11:07 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-21 12:25 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-21 19:13 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 11:38 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-21 16:54 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 14:39 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-21 23:23 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-22 09:29 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-22 02:27 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-22 13:04 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-22 09:14 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-22 13:19 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Chris Gray <cg@GraySage.com> - 2012-02-22 13:41 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-22 10:28 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-22 08:32 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-23 07:36 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-22 08:15 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-22 16:46 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-23 07:47 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 19:53 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-22 00:05 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-22 08:23 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-22 08:49 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-22 18:17 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-23 15:24 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-24 03:28 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-23 20:09 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-24 08:53 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 19:27 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 13:07 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-24 08:44 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 18:04 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-24 21:18 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 21:23 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-24 09:54 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 18:40 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-24 11:15 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 20:49 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2012-02-24 17:22 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 22:39 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-25 03:00 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-24 17:44 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-24 23:11 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-24 19:22 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-25 10:14 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-25 07:37 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-25 15:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-25 13:39 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-25 23:26 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-26 10:09 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-26 02:45 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-26 13:05 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 00:53 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-27 15:22 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-27 09:21 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-27 19:47 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-28 19:16 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 05:07 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-29 10:49 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 10:14 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-29 08:28 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-29 08:24 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 16:43 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-29 09:08 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-29 12:17 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-27 12:23 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-28 17:12 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 09:09 +0000
                Re: Itanium fixed Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 20:33 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-25 11:15 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-25 18:10 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> - 2012-02-27 08:47 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-25 12:37 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-25 21:42 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-26 21:00 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-27 09:48 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-27 12:01 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 06:02 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-28 02:04 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 20:58 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 06:00 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-27 14:05 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 09:37 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 11:31 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 11:46 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-27 17:46 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-27 19:42 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2012-02-28 08:22 +0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-28 06:39 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-28 08:26 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-28 08:45 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-28 08:58 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-28 17:24 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 00:19 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-29 09:27 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2012-02-29 17:17 +0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 09:03 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 10:39 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 13:10 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 23:08 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 23:36 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2012-03-01 15:32 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-01 20:52 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-28 13:15 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-28 22:28 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-28 16:13 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 10:04 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-29 10:26 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 18:28 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-29 11:24 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 19:32 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2012-03-01 03:37 +0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-29 12:14 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 18:02 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-29 13:44 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 19:24 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-29 16:22 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-29 22:41 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more mrs@kithrup.com (Mike Stump) - 2012-03-05 08:46 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-05 09:27 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-02-29 00:26 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-03-05 10:46 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2012-03-01 14:16 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-27 11:51 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 06:06 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-27 08:39 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 09:33 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Thomas Womack <twomack@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-27 19:20 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-27 14:36 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-27 15:29 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-27 15:57 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-27 20:42 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-27 21:04 -0600
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Marven Lee" <marven10@gmail.com> - 2012-02-23 11:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2012-02-24 00:26 +0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 02:51 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 11:14 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 03:36 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 11:39 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 03:55 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 12:34 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 15:02 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 03:48 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 11:57 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 05:20 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-02-21 13:43 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-21 10:04 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-21 05:46 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-21 09:57 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-21 08:54 -0800
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-21 14:27 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-02-21 13:15 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-21 19:36 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-02-23 01:49 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-02-26 17:45 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-29 22:50 +0000
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-04 10:04 -0800
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-04 09:35 -0800
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 14:47 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-07 15:24 -0800
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-03 12:58 -0800
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-08 11:05 -0600
    Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-07 20:04 +0000
      Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-08 11:26 -0600
        Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-09 08:09 +0100
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-09 06:23 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-09 19:19 +0100
              Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-09 22:54 -0600
          Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-09 08:14 -0600
            Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-02-09 19:11 +0100

csiph-web