The book "Computer Architecture: Concepts and Evolution" by
Blaauw and Brooks has many descriptions on how instructions got
to be the way they did.
The book covers a wide variety of machines, though S/360 is
a favorite example. (Blaauw was the main designer of S/360,
so it isn't so surprising.)
Do any of you old-timers (e.g. Fairchild, Cole) know how the EDIT (ED)
instruction came to be the way it is? It's one of the original IBM 360
instructions. Has to be the most complicated of them. Did they have
microcode back then?
The main thing that bugs me about this instruction is that if you w
From: "glen herrmannsfeldt"
Sent: Tuesday, 30 August 2011 6:14 PM
The book "Computer Architecture: Concepts and Evolution" by
Blaauw and Brooks has many descriptions on how instructions got
to be the way they did.
The book covers a wide variety of machines, though S/360 is
a favorite example.
>(after I wrote)
>> The book "Computer Architecture: Concepts and Evolution" by
>> Blaauw and Brooks has many descriptions on how instructions got
>> to be the way they did.
>> The book covers a wide variety of machines, though S/360 is
>> a favorite example. (Blaauw was the main designer of S/3
From: "glen herrmannsfeldt"
Sent: Tuesday, 30 August 2011 8:39 PM
>(after Glen wrote)
The book "Computer Architecture: Concepts and Evolution" by
Blaauw and Brooks has many descriptions on how instructions got
to be the way they did.
The book covers a wide variety of machines, though S/36
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:14:45 -0700, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>The book "Computer Architecture: Concepts and Evolution" by
>Blaauw and Brooks has many descriptions on how instructions got
>to be the way they did.
>
>(Blaauw was the main designer of S/360...
I thought that Gene Amdahl was the pri
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:14:45 -0700, glen herrmannsfeldt
wrote:
>The book "Computer Architecture: Concepts and Evolution" by
>Blaauw and Brooks has many descriptions on how instructions got
>to be the way they did.
Thank you! I'll order it.
Benyamin and other responders:
Thank you for all the
that ED
(it) instruction? His reply, "oh, we had fun with that one".
Regards,
John K
From: Tom Marchant
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@listserv.uga.edu
Date: 08/30/2011 08:44 AM
Subject: Re: Edit instruction
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:14:45 -0700, glen herrmannsf
On 30 August 2011 07:45, robin wrote:
> No it isn't, because, for the reason given,
> namely, that IBM software programmers didn't want to use the instruction.
Don't you mean "hardware programmers"?
Tony H.
This is IMHO the old RISC - CISC discussion.
Should we have machine instructions to compute a polynome of grade n?
I don't think so (but there were machines in the 60s which did just that,
and - in that period - they were faster by using such instructions).
Should we have machine instructions to
From: "Tony Harminc"
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 1:46 AM
On 30 August 2011 07:45, robin wrote:
No it isn't, because, for the reason given,
namely, that IBM software programmers didn't want to use the instruction.
Don't you mean "hardware programmers"?
No.
From: "Bernd Oppolzer"
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 5:34 AM
This is IMHO the old RISC - CISC discussion.
Should we have machine instructions to compute a polynome of grade n?
I don't think so (but there were machines in the 60s which did just that,
and - in that period - they were faster by
On 30 August 2011 21:40, robin wrote:
> From: "Tony Harminc"
> Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 1:46 AM
>
>> On 30 August 2011 07:45, robin wrote:
>>
>>> No it isn't, because, for the reason given,
>>> namely, that IBM software programmers didn't want to use the instruction.
>>
>> Don't you mean
> The comfort or discomfort of the ASSEMBLER programmers is not significant in
> this context, in my believe. Due to pipelining and cache issues,
> clever compilers will sooner or later outperform hand-written ASSEMBLER
> programs.
The z196 is able to 'reorder' instructions for execution. Doesn'
developer. I can live with the shame.
Bill Fairchild
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Tony Harminc
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 12:09 AM
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: EDIT instruction
On
ssembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Tony Harminc
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 12:09 AM
> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: EDIT instruction
>
> On 30 August 2011 21:40, robin wrote:
>> From: "Tony Harminc"
On Aug 30, 2011, at 23:29, Fred van der Windt wrote:
>> The comfort or discomfort of the ASSEMBLER programmers is not significant in
>> this context, in my believe. Due to pipelining and cache issues,
>> clever compilers will sooner or later outperform hand-written ASSEMBLER
>> programs.
>
> The
How about just "programmer", then? "Hardware programmer" vs. "software
programmer", to me, makes a false distinction. I suppose a "software
programmer" might make sense if you're writing assembler code for a
non-existent hardware architecture (mayhap the millicode folks are thus
software programm
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 09:49:20 -0400 Phil Smith III wrote:
> Nowadays, of course, you can just say "programmer" and
> nobody bats an eye. And so the language evolves.
Losing (completely) the etymology of "computer" - being those *people*
(all women ?) that did the computing of tables. Interesting th
IBM Mainframe Assembler List wrote on
09/01/2011 10:09:50 AM:
> From: Shane
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 09:49:20 -0400 Phil Smith III wrote:
> > Nowadays, of course, you can just say "programmer" and
> > nobody bats an eye. And so the language evolves.
> Losing (completely) the etymology of "computer
From: "Tony Harminc"
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 3:08 PM
On 30 August 2011 21:40, robin wrote:
From: "Tony Harminc"
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 1:46 AM
On 30 August 2011 07:45, robin wrote:
No it isn't, because, for the reason given,
namely, that IBM software programmers didn't
s the principle architect of 360.
> A search to check my facts seems to reveal that Amdahl, Blaauw
> and Brooks led the design team.
I don't know the actual hierarchy, but yes it was those three.
My feeling was that Blaauw made the higher level decisions
(should we have an EDIT instructi
From: "glen herrmannsfeldt"
Sent: Saturday, 3 September 2011 10:53 AM
As to programming, microcode is now usually considered
firmware, though the term is likely more recent than S/360.
The microcode of most S/360 models was actually hardware,
physical capacitors or transformers.
short ferrit
On Sep 6, 2011, at 05:39, robin wrote:
> From: "glen herrmannsfeldt"
> Sent: Saturday, 3 September 2011 10:53 AM
>
>
>> As to programming, microcode is now usually considered
>> firmware, though the term is likely more recent than S/360.
>> The microcode of most S/360 models was actually hardware
We are a long way from the edit instruction; and I am not sure that CCROS---It
was in my experience used chiefly for device addresses, which of course
varied/vary from shop to shop---a µprogramming vehicle is not, I think, a good
or even defensible use of words.
CEs or sysprogs did indeed
From: "Justin R. Bendich"
Sent: Tuesday, 30 August 2011 1:29 PM
Do any of you old-timers (e.g. Fairchild, Cole) know how the EDIT (ED)
instruction came to be the way it is? It's one of the original IBM 360
instructions. Has to be the most complicated of them.
The EDMK instruction is the most
On 8/29/2011 11:29 PM, Justin R. Bendich wrote:
Do any of you old-timers (e.g. Fairchild, Cole) know how the EDIT (ED)
instruction came to be the way it is? It's one of the original IBM 360
instructions. Has to be the most complicated of them. Did they have
microcode back then?
My understanding
From: "Gerhard Postpischil"
Sent: Tuesday, 30 August 2011 2:57 PM
On 8/29/2011 11:29 PM, Justin R. Bendich wrote:
Do any of you old-timers (e.g. Fairchild, Cole) know how the EDIT (ED)
instruction came to be the way it is? It's one of the original IBM 360
instructions. Has to be the most comp
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:29:06 -0400 "Justin R. Bendich"
wrote:
:>Do any of you old-timers (e.g. Fairchild, Cole) know how the EDIT (ED)
:>instruction came to be the way it is? It's one of the original IBM 360
:>instructions. Has to be the most complicated of them. Did they have
:>microcode back th
At 14:46 +1000 on 08/30/2011, robin wrote about Re: EDIT instruction
-- idiosyncrasies:
A trivial 'solution' is to have a some leading zeros in the
decimal number being converted.
Or have the target field of the instruction start one byte before the
actual target position and
From: "Robert A. Rosenberg"
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011 1:02 PM
At 14:46 +1000 on 08/30/2011, robin wrote about Re: EDIT instruction
-- idiosyncrasies:
A trivial 'solution' is to have a some leading zeros in the
decimal number being converted.
Or have the
Out of Office - Return Tues. 9/6/11
I am out of the office until Tuesday, September 6th 2011.
33 matches
Mail list logo
