On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 00:30:50 +0200, Patriek Lesparre wrote:
>If you take away all new registers and the new address space of the Z380,
>you would still benefit greatly from the enhanced instructions. They are
>NOT depending on those features!
I think you are a lazy programmer. (-;
>Have you at all read the Z380 manual?!
Yes, a long time ago, and I think it's good, but even at that
time, I knew processors a lot better than it (like PPC). So, of course
I did not put "that" attention to it. I will read it carefully when
I will program for it. I have no time to expend on learning an ASM
language that maybe I'll never use. At this time,I had re-read almost
two time all Z80 ASM books I have here, to look how I can benefit from
it's features, instead of dreaming with a never-ending history.
>I believe you once said you're not a real assembly programmer.
HAHAHAHA. I learn ASM programming just 11 years ago. And I'd programming
somewhat actively since begginig of 98.
> That would
>explain why you don't see the great improvement the Z380 instruction set
>offers, even without the new registers and address space.
I understand, son. But if you think that easy programming will
bring us more programmers, or even better programs, sorry, but you
are very, very wrong. Processors easy to program and "little barriers"
bring us laziness. If you say me: "Lets use Z380 coz it has an BIG
address space and it'll let us do *this* and *that*, which are not
possible with only 64K", I'll agree you. If you say: "Let's use
Mult and Div" because we will be able to create 3D games impossible
without these instructions", I'll agree with you. If you say me: I want
to do LD HL,DE because I don't want to use PUSH DE, POP HL or LD E,L ,
LD D,H , I'll not agree with you, unless you proof me which application
that is not possible today without this feature will be possible.
To make the things easier... let's program Visual Basic on a PC. (-;
>Like I said before, the new instructions are NOT a consequence of the new
>registers and address space! Read the manual again.
If the computer using Z380 arrive to my hands, I'll for sure. By now,
I believe on those WORK with HARDWARE and read the manual everyday
and say me what is good and what is not. And the things you are talking
"that are awesome", I really think are good thinks, but not "awesome".
As a Z80 programmer, I like to program it because it's easy to program,
but also because it's very limited and even on this way I can do very
interesting things with it.
And I think: "Ricardo do with a MSX what you don't do with your Pentium".
And he is RIGHT. The ones that KNOW how to do, don't need to wait for a
new machine. Do it now. And it works... better or worst, but works.
Look at MUST. It's the "MSX MP3"... (-; Of course with Z180 it'll be
possible to play REAL MP3 with full quality, but with Z80 and PSG, the
best is what MUST do... (when talking about compressed sound).
This is the real chalenge. I don't care if I can do LD DE,HL with a
single instruction or it will need two instructions. I care if I CAN
do something or if I CAN'T. And WHAT Z380 CAN DO THAT Z80 CANNOT?
Address 4Gb of RAM, switch between 4 banks of 32 bit registers, MULT,
DIV...
>x86 isn't powerful at all. Z380 is more powerful than 386 at same clockspeed!
>The only reason 486 and Pentium-series are more powerful than 386 is
>because they are superscalar, so that doesn't count. Besides using a recent
>x86-processor would mean a HUGE cost in board-design 'n stuff...
Hey, come on. 386 + 387 (once Z380 HAS a math processor inside it...
better... It IS a MMU with a processor inside it) do more things than
Z380. Some things I really like on 386 (I don't remember if they are
on Z380 also, but I think they are not:
- 386 even manages multiple v86 sessions. This is a complex task,
and very usefull when multitasking.
- 386 helps to manage virtual memory (swap).
- The main feature VERY NICE on x86 processor is generate address
spaces always begining at 0000:0000:0000:0000. (-; This is nice.
There is no need for relocatable code if you have such feature
- 386 (and even 286, if I'm not wrong) has the interesting feature
of hardware protection for applications, throught the rings.
x86 is a great processor. It just lacks some more registers,
and a better computer (the PC architeture is very bizarre and
use the x86 on the worst way possible).
But when I talk on x86, I means x equal or greater than 3. (-;
>You want to program PowerPC assembly? neither do I!
I don't know. I was looking for some PPC ASM books. It's a wonderful machine.
>Heh, why not use MIPS 4000 or something... Those processors aren't even
>designed for assembly programming.
(-; All processors are designed to talk on their own language. (-;
It may be easy or difficult, but you can always benefit on programming
ASM. Of course, it you have a good assembler that do the optimizations
on alignment. Do alignment "on hand" is very hard and boring.
>You yourself said how important it is to use a processor architecture
>people are already familiar with. MSX people are familiar with Z80, so use
>a Z80-family processor.
This is a good point! I agree. (-; But it's easy because you know
it. For those that program mainly 68k ASM, Z80 ASM (even if easier)
is weird.
BTW, Z80 and it family is almost from x80 family. It's based on Intel
convention. So, it'll be very common you think Motorola convention
is weird. But it's not really "difficult". It's just different.
AbraçOS/2, Daniel Caetano ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
...!m.tag
OS/2 Sites: http://www.quasarbbs.com/daniel/
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/8752/os2hp/os2index.html
MSX Sites: http://www.fudeba.cjb.net/
Drawings: http://www.djgallery.tsx.org/
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and put "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) in
the body (not the subject) of the message.
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information on MSX can be found in the following places:
The MSX faq: http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
The MSX newsgroup: comp.sys.msx
The MSX IRC channel: #MSX on Undernet
****
