Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!amdcad!rpw3
From: rpw3@amdcad.AMD.COM (Rob Warnock)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Complex Instructions
Message-ID: <25327@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Date: 22 Apr 89 02:20:55 GMT
References: <807@microsoft.UUCP< <92634@sun.uucp< <13322@steinmetz.ge.com> <5965@pdn.paradyne.com> <1244@l.cc.purdue.edu>
Reply-To: rpw3@amdcad.UUCP (Rob Warnock)
Organization: [Consultant] San Mateo, CA
Lines: 30

In article <1244@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
+---------------
| In article <5965@pdn.paradyne.com<, alan@rnms1.paradyne.com writes:
| < In article <17363@cup.portal.com< bcase@cup.portal.com writes:
| < <                       ...  Why did Motorola delete CALLM?
| < < Maybe it's because nobody used the instruction.  :-) :-)
| > don't remember now what the motivation for dropping CALLM was, other
| > than lack of use.  That seems like sufficient justification in itself.
| Could this be another example of the vicious cycle?  The language does not
| use the instruction, therefore the instruction does not get used, therefore
| the instruction gets dropped...
+---------------

Gerry Weinberg, in his neat little book "Re-thinking Systems Analysis",
calls this "The Railroad Paradox". The 2:30pm train to the city zooms
on by without stopping, but some suburban wives would like to take that
one into the city sometimes so they can shop before meeting hubby for
dinner. They write several notes and petitions, finally getting back a
polite letter from the railroad which says, "We have stationed an observer
on the platform at your stop for a week now who reports that there is
never anyone waiting for the 2:30pm train to stop. Therefore, we must
regretfully deny your request." He also gives computer-related examples...


Rob Warnock
Systems Architecture Consultant

UUCP:	  {amdcad,fortune,sun}!redwood!rpw3
DDD:	  (415)572-2607
USPS:	  627 26th Ave, San Mateo, CA  94403