Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!nather
From: nather@ut-emx.uucp (Ed Nather)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: registerless architecture
Summary: Those who don't read history are compelled to repeat it
Message-ID: <39637@ut-emx.uucp>
Date: 13 Nov 90 16:48:41 GMT
References: <1990Nov12.145410.29035@cs.cmu.edu> <3168@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin; Austin, Texas
Lines: 26

In article <3168@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>, jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes:
> From article <1990Nov12.145410.29035@cs.cmu.edu>,
> by spot@WOOZLE.GRAPHICS.CS.CMU.EDU (Scott Draves):
> > 
> > Has anyone every thought about or done a registerless architecture?
> 
> My Ultimate RISK (Computer Architecture News, 1988) is a memory-to-memory
> architecture with no registers in the instruction execution unit other

Many years ago there was this microprocessor, see, that was 16 bits (!!)
when all the others were only 8 bits, and it was going to be a real
world-beater and wipe out Intel, Motorola, etc.  The thing HAD NO
REGISTERS either, went memory-to-memory because that's where everything
ends up anyway, so what good are registers?  It was made by that powerhouse
of computing called Texas Instruments who, as you know, wiped out all the
competition and changed its name to IBM and ...

Actually, I've forgotten (or suppressed) the chip number, but it was a
real dog, much too slow compared with its competition, and died the
Death of Dumb Chips long, long ago.

Aren't there any CS courses that teach the History of Computer Architectures?

-- 
Ed Nather
Astronomy Dept, U of Texas @ Austin