Well, the hardware does move a 256 byte area aligned on a 256 bytes
boundary very efficiently.  And would allow you to load the register
with an address without storing the last byte.  So a storage pool with
allocation of multiples of 256 bytes would greatly helped.

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 10:53 PM Phil Smith III <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Peter Relson wrote:
>
> >I don't know the answer, but the usual answer is:
>
> >because either the Java team or the compiler team found something
>
> >beneficial to having it.
>
>
>
> Which leads one to wonder.at what point does the C in CISC make this a losing 
> proposition? Are we there yet?
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to