Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!dotsrc.org!filter.dotsrc.org!news.dotsrc.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Brinkhoff Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: 6502 anyone ? Organization: nocrew References: <86h91uui7d.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:24:20 +0200 Message-ID: <86d1chvs8b.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:naLYBjxVZNMCvJU+XvU0zLQnn4g= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Lines: 12 NNTP-Posting-Host: 178.18.91.250 X-Trace: news.sunsite.dk DXC=16lKEPabA7[lYZ9SO[1HBfORCSCcSD5J_h8H;EFSI2Ic:1WDKBS X-Complaints-To: staff@sunsite.dk Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:57139 Mark Wills wrote: > The TMS9900 family has my all time favourite instruction set, followed > by the 68K family. I've looked at x86 but that too looks vile so I > always stayed away from it. I was almost born and raised with the 68000. The x86 instruction set looks obnoxious and the encoding is even worse! However, my assemblers for those two turned out to be almost the same in size, which felt like a dissapointment. Of course, "size of assembler written by random dude" isn't a good metric for instruction set complexity.