From: dano@usl.edu (Dan Stephenson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: 040 and 486 and nap42487 knows nothing about CPUs.
Date: 13 Apr 92 21:54:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: srl01.dano.703202048
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern Louisiana

rjc@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) writes:

>In article <1992Apr13.152041.13375@ctr.columbia.edu> jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>>rjc@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) writes:
>>>
>>>  Let's just face the fact (my personal opinion) that the Intel
>>>instruction set sucks, its kludgy, modal, limited in registers, not
>>>orthogonal. Its a real bitch to program in assembly compared to Motorola.
>>>
>>I disagree.  Why don't you stop throwing around the word "kludge", since
>>you obviously don't know what it means.  Geez, according to Amigoids,
>>everything non-Motorola and non-Amiga is a "kludge".  As far as the
>>instruction set goes, I maintain that it's different, not worse.  Ortho-
>>gonality isn't everything.

>   The Intel HW is kludgy because it lacks the elegance of the Motorola
>chips. For instance, 16-bit mode vs 32-bit mode. There is only one
>reason the 16bit mode is still there, backwards compatibility. The Intel

This backwards compatibility is because MSDOS/Intel PCs came out before
Macs/Amigas, and *therefore* the biggest reason why Macs/Amigas are _not_
dominant.

>hardware is carrying around extra baggage from it's 16bit days because
>it cannot afford to drop ms-dos compatilibility. Motorola 680x0 started

It isn't so much that Intel machines cannot 'afford' to drop MSDOS,
quite the opposite.  Strictly speaking, it is in fact MOST affordable for MANY
people to get PC clones over Macs/Amigas.

>out with full 32bit registers (24bit addressing), and a flat memory model.

>  Jerry, why don't you tell me what makes the Intel instruction set/design
>better than Motorola's?  Is it all the overloading of registers (special

Well, obviously, that terribly inferior instructionset/design has
more/better/cheaper things for it, more often than not.  But I am
no harware expert.

>case side effects)? The different modes? The segments? The small amount
>of general registers? The convoluted mnemonics?

>   There are only two possibilities I see, the string copying instructions,
>stuff like 'rep' etc, and the 32bit segments.

>   Other than that, none sane assembly programmer would touch it. I've been
>an assembly programmer for 6 years, and I associate with people who
>program both CPU's (and a hell of a lot more, like 6502s, 68HC11, etc)
>The concensus is (even by intel asm programmers themselves) that the
>Motorola instruction set is better.

If it makes any difference, a friend who has programmed on both the
Atari 1040ST and PC clones had addressed this.  He basically said that
people who programm the 68000 (example) usually start on that, so moving
to Intel makes for more of a 'new' problem. ie, he says: "You get used
to it.  If you'd started with Intel, it would be difficult, at least at
first, to move to a 68000.


>  Do you deny Jerry that the IntelHW carries extra baggage that's not
>really needed for a real-32bit OS? The V8086 mode smacks of chip

RIf it makes you feel any better, the 80586 due out this year does
away with 8086 emul.

>>| Drummers do it... | Inc.  Waltham, MA USA | in my book of memories.        |
>>|    ... In rhythm! |     (617) 890-2888    |              -- Guns N' Roses  |
>>+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
>>|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
--
Daniel Anthony Stephenson, player of Praetorius, namer of The Solarium.
dano@srl01.cacs.usl.edu das9674@usl.edu
"I can be, what I want to, and all I need is to get my boogie
down"- Al Jarreau.