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

Groups > comp.arch > #118999

Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC)

From MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.arch
Subject Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC)
References (9 earlier) <2026Oct30.080654@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <1793385253-5857@newsgrouper.org> <2026Oct31.091342@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <1793470952-5857@newsgrouper.org> <2026Oct31.201546@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
Date 2026-10-31 20:44 +0000
Message-ID <1793479457-5857@newsgrouper.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) posted:

> MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> writes:
> >anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) posted:
> >> if we take the "--no-dynamic" away
> ...
> >> But it uses dynamic native-code generation, which you have poo-pooed
> >> as "self-modifying code",
> >
> >I have indeed.
> 
> >If --no-dynamic has to do with dynamically loaded libraries, ABI 
> >allows for them via GOT (without PLT saving a branch in the process).
> 
> No, --no-dynamic falls back to using a threaded-code interpreter,
> while --dynamic (default) uses native code generated at run-time (what
> you call "self-modifying code" and want to disable; other people call
> it "JIT compilation").
> 
> >There are leaf functions which need more than 16 registers--where did I
> >imply otherwise--there are "just not many".
> 
> Here:
> >> >Leaf functions (93%) save no registers at all as they
> >> >perform their duties in the freely-available temporary registers R0..15
> 
> >Remember
> >that 10-wide machine is only retiring 3 I/c.
> 
> I regularly see programs with >3IPC on 5-wide, 6-wide and 8-wide
> machines.  E.g., for "gforth-fast onebench.fs" mentioned above on a
> Darkmont (Core Ultra 225 E-Core).
> 
>   424_922_809      cpu_atom/cycles:u/
> 2_044_802_828      cpu_atom/instructions:u/         #    4.81  insn per cycle
> 
> A few weeks ago <2026Sep21.171615@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> I
> reported measuring 6.75 IPC on a Rocket Lake, which is usually
> considered to be 5-wide, and with reason (only 5 renamer slots etc.).
> Here we see 7 IPC in a loop because the loop contains two cmp+branch
> combinations, which consume only one slot in the path from the
> microcode cache through the renamer to the schedulers.  Both branches
> are taken in the measured loop, i.e., 1 taken branch every 3.5
> instructions.

I see similar (at a smaller scale) when my cores perform CoIssue
(similar to instruction fusing, but designed to leverage RF ports
across instructions. A CoIssued instruction requires no more RF
ports or rename ports than any 'random' instruction can use.

Since STs do not write to RF, STs can be CoIssued with any following
calculation instruction (or branch instruction).

Since conditional Branch instructions do not write RF, they can be
CoIssued with previous calculation instruction.

STs and <conditional> branches make up 30%-odd of instruction stream:
so, the decoder looks to be processing 1.3 I/c in a 1-wide implementa-
tion.

There are other potentials--but since this is not close to RISC-V's
instruction fusing, I had to use a different word.
> 
> - anton

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

Thread

Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-01 08:09 +0000
  Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-01 11:58 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-01 18:03 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-01 20:01 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-02 09:34 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2025-03-02 15:42 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-02 18:30 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2025-03-05 15:01 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-06 00:24 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-06 01:01 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2025-03-02 09:03 -1000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-02 13:51 -0500
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-03 18:05 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-03 19:24 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-03 20:04 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-03 22:41 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-05 18:08 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-05 19:04 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-06 06:53 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-07 14:26 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-08 10:52 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-08 13:03 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-08 19:42 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-09 10:13 -0400
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Torbjorn Lindgren <tl@none.invalid> - 2025-03-09 01:27 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-09 01:46 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-09 07:02 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-09 10:15 -0400
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-03 20:12 -0500
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-04 10:09 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-02 21:26 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 21:57 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-02 23:43 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-03 02:08 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-02 16:35 -0600
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-01 17:59 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-03-01 17:42 -0800
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-01 20:46 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-01 22:25 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 02:40 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-02 13:19 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 21:48 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-03 17:57 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-03 23:27 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-02 22:00 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-03 14:56 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2025-03-01 18:29 -1000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-02 20:02 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 21:50 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-02 22:40 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-03 02:58 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-03 03:36 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-03 07:39 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-03 14:45 +0200
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-03 17:32 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-03 23:26 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-03 07:24 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-03 08:06 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-03 16:41 -0600
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC MarkC <usenet@em-ess-see-twenty-seven.me.uk> - 2025-03-03 12:43 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-03 16:44 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-03 17:53 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-03 23:23 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-04 03:04 -0600
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-04 10:04 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-04 23:27 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-05 07:36 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-06 02:30 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2025-03-06 16:11 -1000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-08 07:27 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-07 02:27 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-07 04:09 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 05:08 -0600
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-07 17:34 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 13:27 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-07 20:07 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 15:00 -0600
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-07 22:51 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 18:40 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 20:49 -0600
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-08 03:28 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-09 02:55 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-10 17:40 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-10 23:17 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-10 19:30 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-11 00:53 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2025-03-10 22:49 -0400
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-11 01:14 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-11 18:00 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-11 21:29 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2025-03-11 22:41 +0100
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC David Schultz <david.schultz@earthlink.net> - 2025-03-11 16:57 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-11 22:40 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-12 08:57 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-12 21:35 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-11 17:44 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2025-03-11 11:15 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-11 18:56 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2025-03-11 13:46 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-11 22:43 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-11 18:52 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-12 00:34 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-11 18:48 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC moi <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2025-03-11 19:07 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2025-03-11 13:39 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-11 22:44 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-11 18:58 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-12 00:37 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2025-03-11 19:28 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-12 00:51 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-12 01:24 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-12 14:14 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2025-03-12 17:08 +0100
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-12 00:36 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-12 09:07 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-12 23:55 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC moi <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2025-03-12 00:27 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-12 00:37 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC moi <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2025-03-12 00:43 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-11 21:26 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-12 00:26 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-12 00:38 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-12 04:02 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-12 09:14 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-11 22:42 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-12 00:42 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-12 08:02 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-12 23:58 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2025-03-13 12:08 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-11 21:18 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-10 23:49 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-11 17:57 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-11 16:20 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-12 00:33 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-12 01:09 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 20:48 -0600
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-07 22:25 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-07 22:45 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-08 14:36 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-08 17:57 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 17:19 -0600
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 13:03 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-07 16:57 -0600
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-08 01:02 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-08 02:08 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-07 17:35 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-07 18:52 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-08 01:00 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-08 00:57 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-07 14:59 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-07 20:25 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-03-11 22:15 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-11 22:48 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-12 00:46 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-12 08:42 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-12 11:48 +0200
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-12 11:28 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-12 14:09 +0200
                rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove (was: Why VAX ..) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-12 16:46 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-12 17:44 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-13 00:03 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-13 00:49 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-13 02:34 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-13 01:48 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Robert Finch <robfi680@gmail.com> - 2025-03-13 05:10 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-13 16:15 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-13 16:29 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-13 16:19 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-13 16:10 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-13 09:40 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-13 16:23 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-13 16:24 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-13 12:43 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-13 19:35 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-13 15:53 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-13 20:59 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-13 17:44 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-13 23:24 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2025-03-16 14:27 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-13 22:55 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-13 21:42 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-13 17:48 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-13 23:25 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-14 00:19 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-14 14:35 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-13 21:08 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-14 01:30 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-13 22:20 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-14 00:16 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-13 23:27 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-14 12:10 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-03-14 11:15 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-14 00:18 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-14 12:06 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-14 12:25 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-14 14:38 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2025-03-14 12:52 +0100
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-14 14:00 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-14 13:18 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-14 16:20 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-14 14:46 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-14 16:51 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-14 15:39 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-14 17:38 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2025-03-14 14:44 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-14 16:37 -0400
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-14 22:23 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove (was: Why VAX ..) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-13 23:06 +0200
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-13 22:07 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove (was: Why VAX ..) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-14 12:43 +0000
                Re: rep movsb vs. simpler instructions for memcpy/memmove (was: Why VAX ..) George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2025-03-16 01:22 -0400
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-13 00:03 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-13 00:01 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-07 13:57 +0200
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2025-03-07 15:23 +0100
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2025-03-03 22:15 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-04 08:39 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-01 16:29 -0600
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-02 01:02 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-02 02:56 -0600
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-02 11:46 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-02 14:39 -0600
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2025-03-02 13:16 -0800
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 22:00 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-02 22:27 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC "Brian G. Lucas" <bagel99@gmail.com> - 2025-03-03 11:04 -0500
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-04 02:09 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC "Brian G. Lucas" <bagel99@gmail.com> - 2025-03-04 11:46 -0500
                Re: PC/IX, not, Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-04 21:00 +0000
                Re: PC/IX, not, Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC "Brian G. Lucas" <bagel99@gmail.com> - 2025-03-04 17:51 -0500
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2025-03-04 16:53 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-04 23:29 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2025-03-05 09:16 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2025-03-07 06:03 -0500
                Re: PC/IX, Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2025-03-08 01:13 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2025-03-03 16:34 +0100
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-03 17:21 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2025-03-03 18:51 +0100
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-03 19:53 +0200
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2025-03-04 16:32 -0500
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-05 01:28 +0200
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-05 00:05 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-05 15:07 +0200
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-03 23:32 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 21:56 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 00:16 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-02 12:10 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2025-03-05 15:28 -0500
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2025-03-05 21:15 +0000
  Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2025-03-01 14:40 -0500
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-01 22:30 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-01 23:19 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-01 17:45 -0600
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2025-03-01 17:45 -0600
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-03-02 16:33 +0200
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2025-03-02 12:03 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-02 21:35 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) - 2025-03-02 21:50 +0000
  Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-03-05 11:58 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-06 00:28 +0000
  Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-24 00:05 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-24 19:28 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-24 20:42 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-26 18:33 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-26 19:56 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-27 06:31 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-27 16:58 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-27 20:43 +0000
                Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-29 16:11 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-29 17:54 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-29 18:09 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-29 20:31 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-30 07:06 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-30 18:34 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-31 08:13 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-31 18:22 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-31 19:15 +0000
                Re: Register windows (was: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-31 20:44 +0000
                Re: Register windows Paul Clayton <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2026-11-04 22:45 -0500
                Re: Register windows antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-07 16:21 +0000
                Re: Register windows anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-07 18:01 +0000
                Re: Register windows antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-08 04:37 +0000
                Re: Register windows Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-08 04:49 +0000
                Re: Register windows antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-08 14:19 +0000
                call and return speed (was: Register windows) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-08 06:33 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-30 00:10 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-30 00:33 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-24 22:20 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-24 23:33 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2026-10-25 12:56 -0400
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-25 18:42 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-25 20:03 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-10-25 23:36 -0400
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-26 18:46 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-26 14:29 -0700
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-26 18:19 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-27 16:41 +0000
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-27 18:16 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-27 21:01 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-27 21:14 +0000
    Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-26 18:06 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-26 18:53 +0000
        Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-26 14:30 -0700
          Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-26 14:32 -0700
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-26 22:16 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-27 10:04 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-10-27 12:44 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-27 13:03 -0700
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Roman Belenov <no@spam.please> - 2026-10-27 20:22 +0300
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-27 18:05 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-27 20:15 +0200
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-27 18:50 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-27 21:16 +0200
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-10-27 12:46 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-27 22:00 +0200
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Dave Yeo <dave.r.yeo@gmail.com> - 2026-10-27 11:14 -0700
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-27 22:19 +0000
            Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2026-10-27 08:18 +0000
              Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-27 22:32 +0000
                Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2026-10-28 08:08 +0000
      Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-26 22:13 +0000

csiph-web