🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.arch
Article #1607

Re: Compiling - RISC vs. CISC

#1607
From: Guy Harris
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1989 18:15
16 lines
1261 bytes
>Uh, yes and no. Compilers for _some_ languages may be easier to
>write for RISC but having recently been working on a COBOL compiler
>for the 88K I can tell you that a _huge_ amount of work is involved
>in handling commercial data types (decimal and variations of decimal).

So, just out of curiosity:

	1) how much work relative to the work involved on CISCs with
	   decimal instructions, counting both the compiler work *and* the
	   incremental CPU design work for the decimal instructions for
	   *all* generations of the CISC (unless, of course, the compiler
	   work for the RISC has to be redone for subsequent generations)?

	2) how much work relative to the work involved on CISCs without
	   decimal instructions, or at least without the whizzo ones on
	   370s and VAXes and the like?
Technical Details
Message-ID: <2263@auspex.auspex.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!auspex!guy
References: <13976@lanl.gov> <199@dg.dg.com> <1973@se-sd.NCR.COM>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Compiling - RISC vs. CISC
Message-ID: <2263@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 20 Jul 89 18:15:57 GMT
References: <13976@lanl.gov> <199@dg.dg.com> <1973@se-sd.NCR.COM>
Reply-To: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 16