Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen
From: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: The CPU with 3 brains
Message-ID: <2852@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Date: 7 Nov 90 14:33:53 GMT
References: <42737@mips.mips.COM> <1990Nov4.014901.23819@zoo.toronto.edu> <PCG.90Nov5195229@odin.cs.aber.ac.uk> <2841@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> <39409@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corp R&D Center, Schenectady NY
Lines: 19

In article <39409@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) writes:

| Well, they are pretty much compatible at the assembly language level.
| When the 8086 was first announced, one of Intel's big claims was that,
| although the binary encoding had changed, you could reassemble your
| 8080 programs and they would run on the 8086.  

  Just isn't so. The claim was that you could run your 8080 assembler
through a compiler (they sad translator) which generated the 8086
assembler source. It did this by actual flow analysis as well as just
changing the mnemonics. The resulting program will only use a total of
64k code and data, rather than take advantage of any of the capability
of the 8086.

  The product is XLT-86, runs on CP/M-86, and I ran about 100k lines of
code through my copy at work.
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
      The Twin Peaks Halloween costume: stark naked in a body bag