From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id TAA04508; Sat, 11 Sep 2004 19:47:06 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA02910 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2004 19:47:05 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.207]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i8BHl5n8017590 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2004 19:47:05 +0200 Received: by mproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 75so97926rnl for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:47:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.67.73 with SMTP id p73mr263870rna; Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:47:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.92.13 with HTTP; Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:47:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4d029f7e04091110476f336ff3@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:47:04 -0400 From: Lars Nilsson Reply-To: Lars Nilsson To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] 32-bit is sticking around In-Reply-To: <200409111656.11952.jon@jdh30.plus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200409092204.02611.jon@jdh30.plus.com> <4d029f7e04091108305534fabf@mail.gmail.com> <200409111656.11952.jon@jdh30.plus.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 41433A19.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 2004:99 2004:99 gui:01 -bit:01 afaik:01 imho:01 sep:01 sticking:02 wrote:03 wrote:03 1987:96 mean:05 probably:05 cheers:06 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 16:56:11 +0100, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Saturday 11 September 2004 16:30, Lars Nilsson wrote: > > > StrongARM? > > > > You mean the technology they bought instead of develop it? > > Intel have developed it quite substantially, IMHO. AFAIK, nobody else has made > such a superscalar/deeply-pipelined CPU with such a conditional instruction > set before, and that's not easy. > > Cheers, > Jon. Sure, they have probably done quite a bit of innovation with it by now. All I know is that back in 1987-88 I was happily doing assembly GUI programming just because it (ARM) was so darn easy to work with, while x86 made my stomach turn. Lars ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners