Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!ames!amdahl!drivax!alexande
From: alexande@drivax.UUCP (Mark Alexander)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Intel Microprocessors
Message-ID: <2206@drivax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 31-Dec-69 18:59:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: drivax.2206
Posted: Wed Dec 31 18:59:59 1969
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Aug-87 04:45:10 EDT
References: <1112@lznv.ATT.COM> <399@aucs.UUCP> <3225@cucca.columbia.edu> <789@unccvax.UUCP> <75@sdeggo.UUCP> <6950@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>
Reply-To: alexande@drivax.UUCP (Mark Alexander)
Organization: Bob-ist Temple of Monterey
Lines: 16

In article <6950@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
> 3) Intel programs are MUCH smaller than 68k programs, due to the many
>one byte instructions (yes I know the instruction set is irregular).

This may not always be true.  It all depends on a number of factors:
the memory model being used, the application, the compiler, etc.

No doubt small model 8086 assembly language programs are smaller than
equivalent 68K assembly programs.  But I've found that large model
8086 programs can be much larger.  A large program like a multi-user
operating system, written in a high-level language like C, may turn out
to be almost the same size on the two processors.  (It was true with
our operating system, at least.  Your mileage may vary.)
-- 
Mark Alexander	...{hplabs,seismo,sun,ihnp4}!amdahl!drivax!alexande
"Bob-ism: the Faith that changes to meet YOUR needs." -- Bob