Linked by Kroc Camen on Tue 22nd Jun 2010 12:46 UTC
Amiga & AROS The fabled Amiga X1000 has been spotted in the wild, in the homeliest of places--Station X, a.k.a Bletchley Park. "The AmigaOne X1000 is a custom dual core PowerPC board with plenty of modern ports and I/O interfaces. It runs AmigaOS 4, and is supported by Hyperion, a partner in the project. The most interesting bit, though, is the use of an 500Mhz XCore co-processor, which the X1000's hardware designer describes as a descendant of the transputer - once the great hope of British silicon." With thanks to Jason McGint, 'Richard' and Pascal Papara for submissions.
Thread beginning with comment 431138
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17

How so? What is exactly so bad about x86 assembler?

Reply Parent Score: 2

n0xx Member since:
2005-07-12

How so? What is exactly so bad about x86 assembler?


http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~mburrel/stuff/ppc-asm.html

"The PowerPC has 32 general purpose registers, each either 32 bits or 64 bits in size (depending on which chip you're using). It should be of note that 32-bit PowerPC and 64-bit PowerPC really have the same instruction set, and 32-bit code will run natively unmodified on a 64-bit chip. 32-bit code is 64-bit code."

win = ++general_purpose_registers;

Reply Parent Score: 2

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

The 80s are calling and they want their assumption the more registers the better back.


First off, most x86 designs are out-of-order making the number of registers exposed to the programmer irrelevant. Second, the X86_64 doubles the number of general purpose registers anyways. So you get basically the same number of registers exposed to the programmer than in most modern RISC processors.

In the end, the only benefit of having a few more registers is that it may delay when you have to deal with the stack, which you have to use too in a RISC machine since register spills are bound to happen.

If you're so afraid of dealing with the stack, maybe you should not be programming at the assembly level to begin with.

Now for real, what is so awful about X86, or at least X86_64 from people who actually program in assembly in both (RISC and CISC).

Edited 2010-06-23 09:07 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

corto Member since:
2005-08-30

How so? What is exactly so bad about x86 assembler?


Exactly ? Too hard to say ... All ? Many things due too inheritance from the past, starting with a cheap design (no vision of the future). There is also the way the memory is address. For me the instruction set is a mess, a bunch of extensions added as is.

But we are off-topic.

Reply Parent Score: 1

aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Are we speaking i386 vs 68k or vs PPC?

Reply Parent Score: 2

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

I was asking for actual quantitative statements, not qualitative opinions from people who obviously haven't coded that much assembler (if ever).

Reply Parent Score: 2

aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Don't ask me, back then I got my first Amiga the guy I meet have had two for very long, it was Igge of Noice. He where writing some demos in assembler (trash'm one version of asm one) on the Amiga but got a 3 or 486 and started writing on that one. And obviously he liked it better and he where probably a much bigger nerd and knowledgeable than 95% of the current crop of Amiga users (5% reserved for people into the demo scene ...)

It was my impression he liked assembler on the 386 better to (his amigas where 500s..)

And with PPC wasn't the saying it was hard to code assembler for it?

Reply Parent Score: 2

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

The funniest part is that CISC machines (like the i386 and MC68K) have such "complex" instructions in order to make the life of the assembly programmer easier.

Where the predominant wisdom for RISC machines was that the complexity was going to be transferred to the compiler.

Which makes it a hoot to hear the arguments by people who haven't programmed any major piece of code in assembler to croon about how great RISC designs are for bare metal programming. Alas, one thing is for certain in this field... those with the least amount of direct experience (or knowledge) tend to be the ones with the strongest opinions.

Oh, well...

Reply Parent Score: 2