You make it sound as if people explaining why they prefer an ISA over other ones are childish
It was not about what is the best ISA for end users at the moment,
You're barking at the wrong tree. I explained why I think x86 is worse than the other contenders here from an ISA point of view. I don't find that any less childish than saying x86 is my favorite because it runs my game.If you are just interested in complaining about things that have absolutely ZERO impact on your life, I do consider that kind of childish. I see way too much hot air vented on "informing" everyone that "x86 is the worse architecture ever"...
You're barking at the wrong tree. I explained why I think x86 is worse than the other contenders here from an ISA point of view. I don't find that any less childish than saying x86 is my favorite because it runs my game.
I work in a CPU design team doing modeling of upcoming CPUs. So I'm confronted with all the intricacies of ISA's and with their implementation in silicon.BTW, Why are your programming ARM in Assembly?
I definitely agree with that (even though outside of my day job, I sometimes need assembly language for high performance computational number theory code).It's EXTREMELY rare to require assembly programming on modern high performance cores today.
Being complicated is not what makes something horrible, it makes things funny. But x86 is overly complicated due to its roots. It's getting better with time, but it still shows that it was designed to be compatible at source level with 8085.But calling the Intel architecture, even at the assembly level an "abomination" is laughable. Sure it's very slightly more complicated, but it might have taken me all of 2 days to get used to it. After that it was a non issue.
Waow. I guess you wouldn't tell us where you are working at though.I work in a CPU design team doing modeling of upcoming CPUs.
If his CPU is available for sale and runs something useful, it could be worthy of being added to my collection. That of course depends on whether I'm able to afford it.Waow. I guess you wouldn't tell us where you are working at though.
Interesting. That's quite a lot of information actually.I will just say the likelihood you used a device which contains a CPU I was involved in is close to 100%
YOU NO FUN!Indeed I won't tell.
Yes. Most companies are strict about that. I'm already very careful not telling things that are not public (I basically search the Web for information to double check). I follow every rule my company dictates but who knows I'm sure several other people in this forum are also not revealing what semiconductor company they are working for (and as far as I can say they also are quite cautious about what they write).YOU NO FUN!
Prohibited to tell due to employment contract clause?
Interesting. That's quite a lot of information actually.
I might guess...
So it's a teensy weensy ubiquitous CPU found almost everywhere in a device that everyone at one time or another has used.Indeed I won't tell. I will just say the likelihood you used a device which contains a CPU I was involved in is close to 100%
Not everybody here is working for a semiconductor company, right?I'm sure several other people in this forum are also not revealing what semiconductor company they are working for (and as far as I can say they also are quite cautious about what they write).
I strongly resent the implication!There are some basement dwelling cavemen as well....
That's a complex problem that requires decompilation, optimization, etc.@Nothingness
A question for you since I'm hopeful that you will have a good answer for it.
Why isn't there some open source tool that takes an EXE as source and spits out a rewritten EXE with all kinds of badly-coded-bottlenecks removed? In other words, something that analyzes the binary code of an EXE and replaces the bad instructions with identical instructions that are known not to give seizures to a particular CPU family? So suppose we give this tool a CRYSIS.EXE and it adds multiple execution paths to the newly rewritten CRYSIS-OPTIMIZED.EXE which detects the CPU family at startup and executes the appropriate codepath? Then CRYSIS would easily run at max possible fps on Pentium 4, AMD Bulldozer, Rocket Lake and maybe even Lakefield!
I was involved in several projects ranging from small embedded DSP (last century) up to application CPUs. So different ISAsSo it's a teensy weensy ubiquitous CPU found almost everywhere in a device that everyone at one time or another has used.
Hmmm....
You didn't say ISA. You said CPU.
Sounds to me like a StrongARM CPU in some storage device (HDD most likely).
But it could be also be some tiny CPU taking care of the NVMe protocol in SSDs.
And if it's not a storage related CPU, then it's gotta be some minuscule almost invisible CPU taking care of some mundane task in a smartphone.
In the UK basements aren't that common, here it's more likely to be a dusty attic.There are some basement dwelling cavemen as well....
I definitely agree with that (even though outside of my day job, I sometimes need assembly language for high performance computational number theory code).
Why isn't there some open source tool that takes an EXE as source and spits out a rewritten EXE with all kinds of badly-coded-bottlenecks removed?
Help us understand why DEC VAX assembly was fun and why x86 assembly is depressing. We (or even just I) would like to feel the despair without actually touching the turdy codeBTW, I realize that in my original response to this thread, I should have included the DEC VAX. It was a lot of fun to write assembler in, even if it wasn't an easily implemented ISA from a hardware standpoint. Writing x86 assembly is depressing, fortunately I rarely have to deal with it.
The way he counts is silly: he counts sub registers as distinct registers. This makes no sense in most cases (exception H/L parts of 16-bit registers that can be accessed as independent 8-bit registers).One thing I've constantly read in articles complaining about x86 is that it doesn't have enough registers. I assume they mean General Purpose registers coz this dang ISA has more than 556 registers!
How many registers does an x86-64 CPU have?
blog.yossarian.net
I've written assembly for a real product less than 10 years ago!BTW, Why are your programming ARM in Assembly?