[TUHS] OT: critical Intel design flaw

[clemc@ccc.com (Clem Cole)]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1556 bytes --]

below..

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
wrote:

>
> I'm highly amused by the irony. Intel throws bazillions of transistors at
> these hyper-complex CPUs in an attempt to make them as fast as possible -
> and
> (probably because of the complexity) missed a bug, the fix for which
> involves... slowing things way down!
>

​+1 however... I think there is a corollary ​

>
> I wonder how many other bugs are lurking in these hyper-complex designs?
> Didn't anyone at Intel stop to think that complexity is bad, in and of
> itself?
>
​Exactly....​
​ and a loud "Amen Brother Chiappa​
."
​

IIRC this is part of the argument Dykstra made with the THE paper years
ago, Parnas in his information hiding paper -- i.e. why microkernels and
proper layering are a good idea.   Keep is simple and do one thing
well/protect yourself against other subsystems not being 100%.  Linux and
Winders are are bad a the processor.

​Yup microkernels are a tad slower and have more overhead, and might
(probably will) cost a little more.   But I really do think simplicity
beats complexity and I'll pay a bit in over head to keep it simple.

The problem of course for my employers over the years, is that many  people
(most
​people ​
probably)
​ ​
do not think me
​ and follow their wallet on the fastest for the cheapest​
;-)

Clem​

ᐧ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20180103/8daee0d8/attachment.html>