Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bcars8!bnrgate!bigsur!bnr-rsc!bcarh185!schow
From: schow@bcarh185.bnr.ca (Stanley T.H. Chow)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: RISC hard to program? (was: Moto's data predicts...)
Message-ID: <3241@bnr-rsc.UUCP>
Date: 16 Jul 90 19:38:05 GMT
References: <WSD.90Jul14184453@unnamed.cs.brown.edu>
Sender: news@bnr-rsc.UUCP
Reply-To: bcarh185!schow@bnr-rsc.UUCP (Stanley T.H. Chow)
Organization: BNR Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 15
Summary:
Followup-To:
Keywords:

In article <WSD.90Jul14184453@unnamed.cs.brown.edu> wsd@cs.brown.edu (Wm. Scott `Spot' Draves) writes:
>no way.  A correctly written program will have no problems with
>alignment on any architecture.  Can you give an example of correct
>code that will fail?  (I am assuming that well written programs are
>correct :)

The problem is, of course, how do you define "correctly written 
program". If you define code that are not portable as poorly 
written, than your statement is meaningless.


Stanley Chow        BitNet:  schow@BNR.CA
BNR		    UUCP:    ..!uunet!bnrgate!bcarh185!schow
(613) 763-2831               ..!psuvax1!BNR.CA.bitnet!schow
Me? Represent other people? Don't make them laugh so hard.