Xref: utzoo comp.unix.microport:3026 comp.unix.questions:12422 comp.unix.wizards:15204
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!uhnix1!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: C bug causes double panic
Message-ID: <3552@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 24 Mar 89 14:22:48 GMT
References: <244@tree.UUCP> <9884@smoke.BRL.MIL> <2044@viper.Lynx.MN.Org> <2863@daisy.UUCP>
Organization: Xenix Support
Lines: 19

In article <2863@daisy.UUCP>, david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter) writes:
> [the 80286] is a lot better than the PDP-11, which is what the chip was
> modelled after...

Right. A chip with a random instruction set, weird adressing modes and
restrictions, and no general-purpose registers was modelled on the PDP-11,
with an orthogonal instruction set and addressing modes, and 6 general
purpose registers.

> Disclaimer: I have no financial interest in Intel or its competitors.  The
> success or failure of the 286 is not related to my success or failure.  Un-
> warranted attacks on computer architectures offends me.

So why make one?
-- 
Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation.

Business: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180.
Personal: ...!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.hackercorp.com.