Talk:One-instruction set computer

message: Somebody slapped a fresh new name on the turing machine. Probably this article should be a redirect, or at least stripped down to a simple explanation of the joke. AlbertCahalan 04:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's become a common name, and what makes you think it's a joke? ajdlinux 06:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

text: See comment (5) at this webpage for my opinion about this; OISC is a lot more than a mere change of name. --r.e.s. (talk) 05:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  this is a joke 

message: The article includes the sentence:
:For more information see Subleq derivative languages
I'm guessing this used to be a link.  However, it says nothing useful now, since it points to nothing and even a Google search doesn't do much but point back to this article.  Any idea to what this should refer?99.245.230.104 (talk) 08:26, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:   Subleq derivative languages 

message: Three different types of OISC are TTA, BMM, and Arithmetic. The body of the article "Instruction types" is broken into several different Arithmetic types examples and general TTA. The structure should be rather:
* Arithmetic
** Subleq
** SBNZ
** RSSB
** and Others...
* TTA
** Example 1
** Example 2
** ...
* BMM
** BitBitJump
** Toga
** ByteByteJump  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.230.41.194 (talk) 12:26, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The structure of the article has to be changed 

message: How to parse? At least one 'Multiple instruction-set computer' was manufactured and sold by IBM—the System 360 model 25—with modifiable microcode that could implement either the IBM 1401 instruction set or a subset of the System 360 instruction set. The microcode was swapped by loading the implementation desired from a card deck. At the time, IBM and Honeywell competed for follow-on business from the IBM 1401—IBM with the System 360 Model 25, Honeywell with the Honeywell 200 series (with a superset of the 1401 instruction set plus an extra bit per memory cell for access delimitation). So, despite its possible status as a term of art, 'Single-instruction set computer' works better for me. — Neonorange (talk) 10:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  One instruction set computer—ambiguous? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on One instruction set computer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090613042342/http://www.caamp.info/ to http://www.caamp.info/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090613042342/http://www.caamp.info/ to http://www.caamp.info/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:47, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The text description of RSSB and its pseudo-code don't match. The text description states that the result of the subtraction is placed both in the Accumulator and also in the operand location. The pseudo-code only places the result in the Accumulator.
I don't know which is correct so I can't fix it.198.91.146.145 (talk) 17:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  RSSB description is inconsistent 

message: Should there be some kind of 'in the media' section that could mention things like <a href="https://jaredkrinke.itch.io/sic-1">SIC-1</a> (also available on <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/2124440/SIC1/">steam</a>? 2600:4040:25B5:BE00:0:0:0:707 (talk) 13:21, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  In the media section?