3 ms·
I agree with the latter portion, and that's the part I like about RISC-V the most. Just wish some of the choices were made differently. Open could be open and
by ddingus 5y ago
I agree with the latter portion, and that's the part I like about RISC-V the most.
Just wish some of the choices were made differently. Open could be open and amazing. We are likely to get open with a bit of hobbling built in early on, and that makes me wonder.
This discussion is much improved over the initial, "unified, but..." one we started with.
- panick21_ 5y agoI think overall it is amazing. I think considering everything they had to do and everything they wanted to achieve, I think they made really, really good overall choices. There are some things here and there one can argue, depending on what one considers the main usecase. Overall I think starting with a very small base makes a lot of sense. In fact they actually went to large in some places and that's why they have been working on a profile that is considerably smaller, less registers and floats in int register standards. Given that this was made by a small group of students and one professor I think its remarkable and innovative.
- ddingus 5y agoI do not think much of the choice on how to do math and not have flags. We will see over time. My preference is a hybrid. There are ops we know will repeat a lot. Targeting those with efficient, small instructions will be a win over this every time. I expect to see that done. Sing the tool chains all come up as a good thing though. We're heading into interesting times.