----------------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 20:37:18 -0800
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Is Scheme/Lisp somehow more "fundamental" than other languages?
> 
> Gabriel Sechan wrote:
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------
>>> 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.
> 
> And you apparently don't know how to read a a spec sheet. I referenced 
> the actual technical manual for the AMD386DX microprocessor. It states 
> directly that those registers are general purpose. It's not their fault 
> that your software is borked.
>
Only if you want to completely redefine the meaning of "general purpose".  A 
dedicated stack register is *not* general purpose.

Gabe
_________________________________________________________________
Climb to the top of the charts! Play the word scramble challenge with star 
power.
http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_jan
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg

Reply via email to