Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register


Groups > comp.arch > #6435

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

From ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com>
Newsgroups comp.arch
Subject Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more
Date 2012-04-04 13:07 +0000
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <jlhh1m$hj1$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References (2 earlier) <9thhmnFdvbU1@mid.individual.net> <jlci0q$55q$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jlei2r$psb$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> <jlf554$lpv$1@speranza.aioe.org> <3c05c00c-c54f-4ce3-bc2f-a66293740d10@ms3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


On 04/03/12 19:31, Quadibloc wrote:

>
> In a word, no. Saving all registers on entry and restoring all
> registers on exit is what subroutines do. An interrupt routine had
> better also save and restore the Program Status Word - the flags, like
> the carry and overflow bit.

Sorry, but that's just misleading, in that any registers used in the
handler must be saved on entry to the handler and restored on exit. This
usually involves inline code not subroutines, which need stack or
equivalent for the call. As for cs and sr, they must be saved before
loading the pc with the address of the int handler, otherwise there is no
return. That pair of saves is usually done in hardware and is invisible
to the programmer.

>
> That point comes even before the standard comment, that the
> *assumption* given can be a big one - but it's actually part of the
> reason for the standard comment. Assuming that the complete machine
> state is saved and restored... but sometimes pieces of machine state
> are hard to find.

What is a standard comment ?.

>
> Thus, on the System/370, the bit that was used in the 360 to make it
> use a form of ASCII was instead used to select an extended control
> mode in which the PSW was supplemented by a set of 16 control
> registers... or something like that, I have to admit my memory is
> hazy.
>
> But the danger of a chip having exotic features that one might disturb
> even if one isn't intentionally using them is real.

Irrespective of processor family, programming at that level does require
intimate knowledge of the architecture and to paper over that by a 
suggestion
of some magic smoke and mirrors, invisible machine state seems
disingenuous :-)...

Regards,

Chris

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


Thread

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 ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-03-27 22:13 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-03-27 22:59 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-28 11:11 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-03-28 18:09 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-03-28 22:29 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-02 15:53 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 11:06 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-03 15:31 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-03 12:31 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-03 17:51 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-04 10:23 +0200
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-04 13:54 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-04 15:22 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-04 16:11 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-04 19:24 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-05 11:01 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-04 13:07 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-04 07:17 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-04 20:38 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-06 21:24 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2012-04-07 04:21 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-04-07 11:28 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-07 08:57 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2012-04-10 11:13 +0200
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-04-10 13:55 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-10 16:44 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-10 13:03 -0500
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-10 19:11 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-04-10 19:09 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-08 14:47 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-07 19:20 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-04-04 09:55 -0400
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-04 14:33 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-04 07:57 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-04 22:46 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-04 10:04 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-03 12:24 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-04 09:53 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-03-28 15:50 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-03-29 11:21 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-03-30 11:58 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 12:39 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-03-29 11:43 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-02 16:41 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 11:09 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-29 06:53 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 11:17 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-03 06:15 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-03 15:03 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-03 07:57 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-04 12:48 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-03 07:11 -0700
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-04 09:59 +0100
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-03-28 12:24 -0700
                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 ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-03-27 22:35 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-03-28 09:52 +0200
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> - 2012-03-28 23:14 +0000
                Re: M68k add to memory is not a mistake any more Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-03-29 13:16 +0200
            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

csiph-web