On Wed, Oct 24, 2018, 17:45 ben via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 10/24/2018 3:58 PM, Eric Smith wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:18 PM ben via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org > > <mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org>> wrote: > > > > Well I can still run DOS BOX and get my nice 8086 instruction set. > > > > > > I've heard many different adjectives used with regard to the 8086 > > instruction set, but this is the first time I've heard it described as > > "nice". > > > > Admittedly there are worse ones. > > > > What about Intel's forgotten object oriented kitchen sink processor. > IAPX-432 better or worse? > I wouldn't call it a "kitchen sink processor"; some of it's problems are actually with things that are missing. However, it's a VCISC, and the instruction set isn't really comparable to anything else. If I had to design a computer for either general-purpose or embedded use, I'd definitely choose 8086 over iAPX 432, but that isn't because I consider the 8086 instruction set to be particularly good.
