Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site loral.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!sdccs6!loral!ian
From: ian@loral.UUCP (Ian Kaplan)
Newsgroups: net.micro.68k,net.arch,net.lang
Subject: Re: Inconsistent bit addressing in the 68020: big- AND little-endian
Message-ID: <444@loral.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 24-Aug-84 13:55:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: loral.444
Posted: Fri Aug 24 13:55:08 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Sep-84 09:59:32 EDT
References: <491@turtlevax.UUCP>
Organization: Loral Instruments, San Diego
Lines: 17


    In Ken Turkowski's article on the big and little endian addressing used
    on the 68020 he commented that Motorola's approach "proved" that a
    machine with consistant bit addressing (e.g., all little or big endian) 
    was impossible.  I assume that he was joking.  If not perhaps a follow 
    up article could be submitted clairifing this.  It is becoming widely
    recognized that consistant (or orthogonal) instruction sets are a
    desirable architectural feature.  (The NS32016 instruction set is
    one example of an orthogonal instruction set.)  If consistant
    instruction sets are desirable, then it seems obvious that consistant
    bit addressing is also desirable.

			    
			    Ian Kaplan
			    Loral Data Flow Group
			    Loral Instrumentation
			    ucbvax!sdccsu3!loral!ian