From: tkoenig@netcologne.de   
      
   Stephen Fuld  schrieb:   
   > On 8/4/2025 9:56 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:   
   >> John Savard  schrieb:   
   >>   
   >>>> And... would you like to have a stack in your architecture?   
   >>>   
   >>> No.   
   >>   
   >> OK.  I think that is the final nail in the coffin, I will   
   >> henceforth stop reading (and writing) about your architecture.   
   >   
   > While I agree that having at least push and pop instructions would be   
   > beneficial, I hardly think that is the most "bizarre" and less than   
   > useful aspect of John's architecture.  After all, both of those   
   > instructions can be accomplished by two "standard" instructions, a store   
   > and an add (for push) and a load and subtract (for pop).  Interchange   
   > the add and the subtract if you want the stack to grow in the other   
   > direction.   
      
   What I meant was that, the way he described his addressind modes,   
   he was not considering a stack at all, even implemented by   
   the usual RISC method (which is better than push/pop, see the   
   special hoops that AMD64 has to jump through to fuse several   
   push or pop instructions into one - IIRC, it costs them a cycle   
   of pipeline length).   
      
   And stacks _are_ extremely efficient, as everybody except one   
   person knows, because they save memory and improve cache locality.   
      
   > Of course, you are free to stop contributing on this topic, but I, for   
   > one, will miss your contributions.   
      
   Hm, thanks.  Maybe I'll look into it again.   
   --   
   This USENET posting was made without artificial intelligence,   
   artificial impertinence, artificial arrogance, artificial stupidity,   
   artificial flavorings or artificial colorants.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)