On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 17:57 +0000, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:28:00 +0000, Russel Winder via
> Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> > It could be argued that it is all just co-routines underneath, but 
> > I
> > think that would be missing the point that we have 55 years more
> > experience of doing these things since that single processor 
> > operating
> > system model was created. We really should be doing this all a lot
> > better these days.
> yet current CPUs are still the same as 50 years before, that is the 
> problem. ;-)

I'd suggest that a Intel x86_64 of 2015 bears only a passing 
relationship to an IBM 360 of the 1960s.

It is true that hardware design has been constrained by a weird 
constraint that no-one has investigated alternative architectures to 
the register/CPU that software people insist is the only way forward.

With all the transistors available per mm² these days, it is about 
time we investigated alternate, implicitly parallel ways of working. 
Intel had a go a few years ago with various alternative dataflow based 
architectures, but they were told by the software people that they had 
no future because software inertia was more important than innovation.
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to