From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dexen deVries To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 22:56:53 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/3.0.0-rc4-l38+; KDE/4.5.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <20110715151535.GA2405@polynum.com> <20110716180627.GA29488@polynum.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201107162256.53336.dexen.devries@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] NUMA Topicbox-Message-UUID: 02cd8c3c-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Saturday 16 July 2011 21:54:33 erik quanstrom wrote: > it's interesting you bring this up. risc has largely been removed > from architectures. if you tie the instruction set and machine model > to the actual hardware, then you need to write new compilers and > recompile everything every few years. instead, the risc is hidden > and the instruction set stays the same. this allows for a lot of > under-the-hood innovation in isolation from the architecture. interesting angle. till now i believed it's easier to innovate in software (even compilers) than in silicon. where did we go wrong that silicon became the easier way? would it be fair to blame GCC and other heavyweight champions? -- dexen deVries > (...) I never use more than 800Mb of RAM. I am running Linux, > a browser and a terminal. rjbond3rd in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2692529