Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #12048

Re: Distinguishing DOES>

Show all headers | View raw

Zbiggy wrote:
> There's nothing wrong with dropping "backward compatibility", if this
> is reasonable.

This comment was clearly tongue-in-check ;-).

But I disagree that the x86 ISA is so long because of backward 
compatibility.  Intel had a chance to demonstrate how a new ISA, 
developed from scratch, would look like, and they came up with IA64.  
Intel instruction sets are so lengthy, because they are designed by 
committees.  x86 is actually good look for all of us, because the main 
ISA design team at that time designed i432, and only a few people were 
left to create the x86 ISA (two, IIRC).  Therefore, x86 is pretty clean 
and straight-forward, even considering the time it was designed (height 
of the CISC age), and that it came from Intel.  And the two modes added 
later (386 mode and amd64 mode) are cleanups, which make the ISA more 
orthogonal and useful.  Additions like MMX and 3DNow! are phased out and 
declared obsolesent (and AMD stopps to implement 3DNow!).  It's not that 
awful.  The worst things from Intel all died.

The ARM ISA is designed by one person, and even then it is one of the 
more byzantine RISC ISAs, with lots of things cobbled together in one 
instruction - shifts, conditional execution, normal operations.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Distinguishing DOES> JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2012-05-03 08:59 -0700
  Re: Distinguishing DOES> Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-03 17:23 -0700
    Re: Distinguishing DOES> Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-05-04 10:47 +0100
      Re: Distinguishing DOES> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-05-04 05:12 -0500
        Re: Distinguishing DOES> anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-05-04 11:33 +0000
          Re: Distinguishing DOES> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-05-04 08:11 -0500
            Re: Distinguishing DOES> anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-05-04 16:18 +0000
              Re: Distinguishing DOES> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-05-05 02:02 -0500
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-05-05 14:16 +0000
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-05-06 02:53 -0500
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-05-05 14:25 +0000
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> BruceMcF <agila61@netscape.net> - 2012-05-05 08:07 -0700
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-08 06:23 -0700
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-05-09 00:25 +0200
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-09 01:26 -0700
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-09 03:18 -0700
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-05-09 05:29 -0500
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-05-09 07:11 -1000
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-05-09 22:48 +0100
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-05-09 23:22 +0200
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-05-09 23:43 +0100
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-05-10 00:49 +0200
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-05-10 11:33 +0100
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-05-10 10:02 +0000
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-05-10 15:13 +0200
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-10 05:07 -0700
                Re: Distinguishing DOES> Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-10 22:57 -0700
  Re: Distinguishing DOES> Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-05-04 12:37 +0000
  Re: Distinguishing DOES> Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-05-04 10:14 -0400
    Re: Distinguishing DOES> humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2012-05-04 20:27 +0000
      Re: Distinguishing DOES> Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-05-05 06:16 -0400
        Re: Distinguishing DOES> JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2012-05-05 07:19 -0700
          Re: Distinguishing DOES> anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-05-05 14:55 +0000
            Re: Distinguishing DOES> JennyB <jennybrien@googlemail.com> - 2012-05-07 07:24 -0700
          Re: Distinguishing DOES> Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-05-06 11:04 +0000
          Re: Distinguishing DOES> Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-05-06 07:47 -0400
        Re: Distinguishing DOES> ward@megawolf.com - 2012-05-08 04:39 -0700
          Re: Distinguishing DOES> Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-05-08 07:50 -0400
  Re: Distinguishing DOES> Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2012-05-05 14:24 +0200
    Re: Distinguishing DOES> Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-05-06 11:09 +0000

csiph-web