Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mmintl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!linus!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Newsgroups: net.arch
Subject: Re: Addressing modes
Message-ID: <1161@mmintl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 4-Mar-86 13:42:05 EST
Article-I.D.: mmintl.1161
Posted: Tue Mar  4 13:42:05 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Mar-86 21:00:37 EST
References: <187@anwar.UUCP>
Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT
Lines: 19

In article <187@anwar.UUCP> mlopes@anwar.UUCP (Marco Lopes) writes:
>In my earlier posting, I assumed the existence of absolute addressing.
>Therefore, a minimum set of addressing modes is:
>
>		register
>		register indirect
>		absolute
>
>Another functionally complete set would have immediate instead of absolute.

You should seriously consider using immediate instead of absolute.  One is
inclined to assume it is inferior, but this is not obvious to me.

Actually, I would recommend using both immediate and absolute addressing
modes.  At this point you have two one-bit decisions: register or immediate,
and direct or indirect; absolute is equivalent to immediate indirect.

Frank Adams                           ihnp4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
Multimate International    52 Oakland Ave North    E. Hartford, CT 06108