From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 2002:a02:560b:: with SMTP id
 o11-v6mr8245870jab.7.1529458594101;
        Tue, 19 Jun 2018 18:36:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5c03:: with SMTP id o3-v6mr39595otk.7.1529458593999;
 Tue, 19 Jun 2018 18:36:33 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!d7-v6no623091itj.0!news-out.google.com!c20-v6ni311itc.0!nntp.google.com!u78-v6no636321itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 18:36:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <90feab2d-db4f-450a-90eb-2721952802f8@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=47.185.195.62;
 posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.195.62
References: <e72534b1-17a7-40b5-92b9-01a4695e2743@googlegroups.com>
 <90feab2d-db4f-450a-90eb-2721952802f8@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a3b7c3bf-ae22-405a-b3fb-de9785fc21d8@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Ada lacks lighterweight-than-task parallelism
From: "Dan'l Miller" <optikos@verizon.net>
Injection-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 01:36:34 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53185
Date: 2018-06-19T18:36:33-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 7:41:21 PM UTC-5, Lucretia wrote:
> On Tuesday, 19 June 2018 23:14:17 UTC+1, Dan'l Miller  wrote:
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/06/18/microsoft_e2_edge_windows_10
> >=20
> > As discussed in the article above, Microsoft is starting to unveil its =
formerly-secret development of what could be described as =E2=80=9CItanium =
done right=E2=80=9C.
>=20
> One of the casualties of the Titanic was PA-RISC, HP should resurrect and=
 redesign PA-RISC for the 21st
> century.

HP and HPE are 2 of Microsoft's closest partners-of-allied-vision (Intel no=
t as much nowadays), both on servers and on mobile consumer products.  I th=
ink that (despite being right on the heals of winning the multi-billion-dol=
lar court judgement against Oracle) HPE's disinterest in continuing to boar=
d the sinking good ship Itanic occurred at precisely the same time as the r=
ise of the secret EDGE-processor project at Microsoft.  (I need to investig=
ate who funded the university work from which EDGE is derived.)  I think th=
at EDGE might have HPE's post-Itanic fingerprints all over it.  We will kno=
w for certain of an HPE=E2=80=93Microsoft joint effort if a server version =
of EDGE supports technology extracted from HPE's The Machine, e.g., resisti=
ve associative RAM.

In other words, your tongue-in-cheek comment is likely what this EDGE-proce=
ssor is all about for HPE, minus the PA-RISC ISA itself: a non-Intel, non-A=
RM, non-SPARC, non-POWER replacement to the PA-RISC/Itanium vision for serv=
ers.