From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 62de6588 for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 20:20:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id E68B9A1DE9; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 06:20:46 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C9F3A1DD2; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 06:20:24 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=RuM9XkYY; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id DB47894119; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 06:20:21 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-lf1-f54.google.com (mail-lf1-f54.google.com [209.85.167.54]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3BB49410D for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2018 06:20:19 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-lf1-f54.google.com with SMTP id t22-v6so8147976lfb.7 for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 13:20:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RxnlLVy3SZsijOpaebihoblslLhKNoA7rAnL83dTdmE=; b=RuM9XkYYCz3hareES/AZHJlswEP42JGZ1Ch6leS97AFX6l54bbyEq67U5eSBDA6AT2 OFnLizV2w6vmb6ROZDXwKTB7lcriSrv5uwqbQHfGGMNpch2zKS9ouFxp5jc0yC/T6jjH 5HVv8agmBmvWfYELS6oTi1sl+O0xcasQ157svVBnjjk2e6TvldteC76JX5Vgiz6njrqk YBP8druq34NLsf73NjrieljWNO8mhR1k57Hd78aOk9/FrXkHpGBT/dCZv40G7nAGuuPb ta/KP7IRCyYoPJ8rAPHxH+8BT4A4GIZT5B/nWSdeaPAo2VYs8jwUGL+A5L+aohlvLOoQ E03w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RxnlLVy3SZsijOpaebihoblslLhKNoA7rAnL83dTdmE=; b=Bd4X+E55AVt7bA8mrchH7lMHr9nt94WnsF9jQNVNw4LFnQnVjeoPGrKP/TuarYLIUb 6tbplbcmrMcfLHgALtLbk/LnI+OJgHxYJKbPJjP0jVFGewhGsDcnKUc7ZYZ4k9Sdb58f WCM/kqcnZLsIYeAQG0sUuA0QwlF6XHdQ4mQWcds7co4ZP/MKPwRHzNBQMCWnzaXv098w o4L87EzUDbqkiqWzglDdN2ouC+qAEdivdvOayFAj5AcrABSm4+vG6F3x/79oozgsw3S/ Q5MGt3ZQ5WE6sVopAp0nCjhD6srcQAeH7HvKJesOyiQ/AW9JiXaKMK5pNs3xAWhWFR8Q Yv8A== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfohrX4m/hcvnm/XJ65mUEhyjtIU+N/YJnxdPgeMhqxgnlL/mj6Pe 5nuY5x3YvDwe7XcDGElkqC4SaFJj5iv0y0XqUwU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV601uzbN1zUGvu9vPRclFrhSlFdejuvSFMqrKm8wQN6AVVCNjYyzEXbihsf2u8VM9MVwzX1VKyXCN+ejgcmt5iY= X-Received: by 2002:a19:13dc:: with SMTP id 89-v6mr309798lft.111.1537820417959; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 13:20:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:82cb:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 13:20:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180924194647.GA29897@server.rulingia.com> References: <1686170E-4323-4BDF-B95C-8A6B3FFD5288@gmail.com> <20180924194647.GA29897@server.rulingia.com> From: Paul Winalski Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 16:20:17 -0400 Message-ID: To: Peter Jeremy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [TUHS] SPARC is CRAPS spelled backwards. X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On 9/24/18, Peter Jeremy wrote: > > In the specific case of x86, I would dispute that. The various warts in > the > x86 instruction set and "architecture" mean that x86 code density is > relatively low and on a par with SPARC code. I agree that the overall > performance is impressive but that is more a measure of the abilities of > Intel's engineers than the overall approach. No doubt about it--x86 instruction encoding is butt-ugly and wasteful, due to the need for backward compatibility with what was originally an 8-bit architecture. Does SPARC have the vector instructions that have been added to x86 over the years? -Paul W.