---------------------------------------- > Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:25:32 -0800 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages? > > Andrew Lentvorski wrote: > [snip] >>>> Gabriel Sechan wrote: >>>> Large register stacks take a lot of chip space, and increase the >>>> transistor count elsewhere as well. When you have limited die space, >>>> you can't have everything. These days cache is more of an issue than >>>> registers, but in the old days the registers were the big transistor >>>> count users. Hence the 6 register intel architecture. >>> >>> Just one of the reasons I loathe the intel architecture. >> >> Um, I thought that x86_64 had finally broken out of this? Am I wrong? > > Yes, you are wrong. Gabe is also wrong. The x386 has 8 general purpose > registers, not six [1]. The AMD64 architecture has 16 general purpose > registers. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64 for general info. In > addition to the general purpose registers, the x86/x86-64 family also > has numerous special purpose registers which make programming less > onerous. Or maybe more so depending on your abilities. Few people have > to work at that low a level. > eax, ebx, ecx, edx, esi, edi. Maybe you can call ebp a general purpose register, although its always used as frame. Esp is *not* a general purpose register, its the stack pointer. Fuck with that at very high risk. You can stretch it to 7, not 8. Wikipedia is wrong.
Gabe _________________________________________________________________ Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your "fix". http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
