From: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca   
      
   >>Maybe a way to avoid that problem   
   >>is to make the renaming architectural.  I.e. add a "register renaming   
   >>table" (RRT), and introduce the instruction RENAME which changes   
   >>that RRT.  Whenever an instruction wants to read register Rn, the actual   
   >>architectural register we'll read is obtained by passing `n` through RRT.   
   >   
   > All of that happens with microarchitectural renaming (your RRT is   
   > called RAT (register alias table), however).  Your "RENAME"   
   > instruction is called "MOV".  Why make the RAT architectural?   
      
   Good question.  I was just reacting to Mitch who seemed to say that one   
   of the main problems with a multi-move instruction is that it has too   
   many output and that doesn't fit into the general design, so by making   
   the RRT/RAT architectural it makes the instruction single-output.   
   I don't know if in practice it would make any difference.   
      
      
           Stefan   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)