Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!olivea!tymix!cirrusl!ss168!dhesi From: dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: ---486 compatibility with 8008 Message-ID: <2682@cirrusl.UUCP> Date: 12 Nov 90 20:51:30 GMT References: <1990Nov4.014901.23819@zoo.toronto.edu> <1990Nov6.223738.13265@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <9333@b11.ingr.com> <1990Nov9.164838.26423@amd.com> Sender: news@cirrusl.UUCP Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc. Lines: 18 Zilog's symbolic language was SUCH a turkey, that several extended Intel symbolic assembly languages were developed... Zilog's assembly language was far more regular and elegant than that of Intel. The proof of the pudding is that Intel's later assembly languages (8086 onwards) far more resemble Zilog's language for the the Z80 than Intel's language for the 8080. Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, etc, Intel essentially replaced Zilog's LD with MOV, and replaced Zilog's parentheses (denoting indirection) by sqare brackets. There were, however, many 8080 programmers who were unwilling to spend the 25 minutes it took to learn the new language and instead spent weeks and months inventing awkward extensions of the old one. -- Rahul Dhesi UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi