Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site peora.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
From: jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos)
Newsgroups: net.arch
Subject: Re: uninitialized data
Message-ID: <1714@peora.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-Oct-85 09:02:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: peora.1714
Posted: Wed Oct  9 09:02:19 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 06:49:47 EDT
References: <436@uvm-cs.UUCP> <164@tulane.UUCP> <200@mips.UUCP>
Organization: Perkin-Elmer SDC, Orlando, Fl.
Lines: 18

> For perspective, let us remember that one finds there [2nd Ed, 1982, p.335]:

This approach of claiming that a major text in Computer Science is
discredited just because it took Intel's "preliminary" announcements on the
432 as describing a completed product is not a very reasonable one. Myers'
text is well-known and respected.

Likewise, the argument "the 432 didn't succeed, so the architectural
principles behind it are invalid" is a very common one among CISC-detractors,
but it makes little sense.  Just because someone's implementation of an
architecture was unsuccessful doesn't mean the architecture is somehow
invalidated.  Look at Multics vs. Unix.
-- 
Shyy-Anzr:  J. Eric Roskos
UUCP: Ofc:  ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
     Home:  ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jerpc!jer
  US Mail:  MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC;
	    2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642