Article View: comp.arch
Article #1607Re: Compiling - RISC vs. CISC
From: Guy Harris
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1989 18:15
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1989 18:15
16 lines
1261 bytes
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!guyReferences:
<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