Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!mintaka!churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu!rjc
From: rjc@churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell)
Subject: Re: 680x0 vs 80x86
Message-ID: <1991Jun25.165516.13021@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: news@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu
Organization: The Internet
References: <92@ryptyde.UUCP> <4671.tnews@templar.actrix.gen.nz> <1154@stewart.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 91 16:55:16 GMT
Lines: 35

In article <1154@stewart.UUCP> jerry@stewart.UUCP (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>jbickers@templar.actrix.gen.nz (John Bickers) writes:
>>
>>    It's usually because if you have a split cache you break programs
>>    that use self-modifying code.
>>
>
>Doubtful, John, since every OS in existence treats code as data when it
>loads it into memory for execution.

  But this is different, Jerry, because in this case the OS KNOWS
how to clear caches. If a lot of MS-DOG programs used self-modifying
programs, or if the OS itself doesn't know how to treat caches,
code will break. Hence, Intel probably keeping I&D unified to avoid
an MS-DOG nightmare.

  
>>--
>>*** John Bickers
>--
>+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+
>| JERRY J. SHEKHEL  | POLYGEN CORPORATION  | When I was young, I had to walk |
>| Drummers do it... | Waltham, MA USA      | to school and back every day -- |
>|    ... In rhythm! | (617) 890-2175       | 20 miles, uphill both ways.     |
>+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+
>|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
>|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+


--
/ INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu     *   // The opinions expressed here do not      \
| INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net  | \X/  in any way reflect the views of my self.|
\ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023        *                                              /