Re: Assembler most efficient??? (was Re: What is wrong with OO ?)

[jvl@ocsystems.com (Joel VanLaven)]

  Just to add my little bit of trivia, I read once about the CRISP
architecture designed by ATT (I think) that stood for the C Rational
Instruction Set Processor, that was designed almost solely to be better
for programs written in C.  I think they decided that optimizing the
stack was very important for the C programs they were working with and
so designed a special "stack cache."  Actually, much of UNIX is written
in C anyway, so optimizing for the compiler IS optimizing for the OS,
at least indirectly.

Larry Kilgallen (kilgallen@eisner.decus.org) wrote:
: In article <dewar.852989882@merv>, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:

: > Do you really have evidence of this? What machines are you talking about?
: > I know quite a bit about the design of the common processor chips around,
: > and I really cannot think of one case where the scenario you present above
: > rings true. On the contrary, for example, the design of the MIPS chip was
: > done with input from compiler considerations all along the way. In some
: > sense the whole business of pipelined RISC architecture is intimately
: > wound up with compiler considerations.

: Compared to the operating system groups, the DEC compiler groups had
: as much if not more input to the designers of the Alpha chips.

: Larry Kilgallen
-- 
-- Joel VanLaven