> I encourage anyone to open the original document published in 2011 [1] and compare it with current RISC-V specification documents [2]. And for extra credit,

> I encourage anyone to open the original document published in 2011 [1] and compare it with current RISC-V specification documents [2]. And for extra credit, look how much it changed with respect to the thing that's being discussed around this submission. Integer arithmetic and carry or overflows in base ISA. Carry flag, add? Sltu? Oh right, the base ISA hasn't changed so much after all. > Moreover, it mainly consists of the basic RISC-V ISA which is indeed designed to be simple and minimalist, whereas the current RISC-V full spec. consists of a multitude of extensions. Hand waving about 10 years of extensions and shuffling things around does little to address criticism concerning the base ISA. Hilariously so when these extensions fail to address the criticism at all. Still no analysis either. I'm not going to call out misinformation in a post free of information.