Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!ukc!strath-cs!cs.glasgow.ac.uk!wf
From: wf@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Mr Bill Findlay)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 64 bits--why stop there?
Message-ID: <6106@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>
Date: 20 Aug 90 14:12:55 GMT
References: <5539@darkstar.ucsc.edu> <13285@yunexus.YorkU.CA> <30728@super.ORG> <9660@ganymede.inmos.co.uk> <224@csinc.UUCP> <1263.26cdaecc@waikato.ac.nz>
Reply-To: wf@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Mr Bill Findlay)
Organization: Comp Sci, Glasgow Univ, Scotland
Lines: 10

In article <1263.26cdaecc@waikato.ac.nz> ccc_ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University) writes:
>I remember reading a very old book by M V Wilkes, called "Basic Machine
>Principles". I was only a school student at the time, and I didn't
>understand many of his arguments. But one thing that stuck in my mind
>was his concept of structuring the virtual (i e programmer-visible)
>address space on a tree basis, so that regions--at any level--could
>grow and shrink independently. The advantage was that you could
Actually, the book was by J.K Iliffe.
He prototyped a machine while working for ICL about 20 years ago,
but the architecture was rejected as the basis for a range of machines.