Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!granite!jmd
From: jmd@granite.dec.com (John Danskin)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: The NeXT Problem
Message-ID: <296@granite.dec.com>
Date: 20 Oct 88 18:22:31 GMT
References: <26435@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <5498@juniper.uucp> <250@dataspan.UUCP> <7399@aw.sei.cmu.edu>
Reply-To: jmd@granite.UUCP (John Danskin)
Organization: DEC Technology Development, Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 19

::In article <7399@aw.sei.cmu.edu> firth@bd.sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) writes:
::>In article <250@dataspan.UUCP> deraadt@dataspan.UUCP (Theo De Raadt) writes:
::>
::>>I puke trying to write assembly on RISC machines...
::>
::>I'd be interested to know whether that's a generally held view.
::>... I wrote a fair amount of assembler, and found it both
::>easy and pleasant.  Far less bothersome that, say, Vax or MC68020
::>assembler.
::
I thought exactly the same thing. I have to write assembly code or
microcode for lots of different machines, and I have had the easiest
time with risc machines. Largely because of the regular architecture,
easily determinable timing, and lack of squillions of features that you
MUST use to achieve performance.
-- 
John Danskin				| jmd@decwrl.dec.com  or decwrl!jmd
DEC Advanced Technology Development	| (415) 853-6724 
100 Hamilton Avenue			| My comments are my own.
Palo Alto, CA  94306			| I do not speak for DEC.