4 ms·
I was not being critical of RISC-V, or dismissing it. I was saying that performance is the metric end users care about, and that HN commenters spend too much ti
by therealcamino 4y ago
I was not being critical of RISC-V, or dismissing it. I was saying that performance is the metric end users care about, and that HN commenters spend too much time arguing endlessly about the code density metric.
I don't understand your final paragraph even a little bit. It's a bit odd.
- snvzz 4y agoCode density and performance go hand in hand. Higher code density means higher likeliness that performance-critical code will fit in L1$.
- therealcamino 4y agoCode density is one factor in a tremendously complex system. The entire design philosophy of RISC architectures for the last 35+ years is predicated on the notion that it's not the most important one, and shouldn't be focused on in isolation.
- snvzz 4y agoThe RISC paper was all about the need to strongly justify any complexity. I don't quite remember it even touching code density.
- therealcamino 4y agoFrom the abstract of the RISC-1 paper: "Although instructions are simpler, the average length of programs was found not to exceed programs for DEC VAX 11 by more than a factor of 2."