3 ms·
> What always strikes me about these expositions of x86 and its predecessors is how neutral the language is. Well, I mention that the 8086 is convoluted, compl
by kens 4y ago
> What always strikes me about these expositions of x86 and its predecessors is how neutral the language is.
Well, I mention that the 8086 is convoluted, complex, and full of corner cases, so I think there's enough editorial :-)
As far as "seriously wacky", there are much stranger systems. For instance, the Honeywell 1800 mainframe has two program counters, and they can go forward or backward. The Intel iAPX 432 has instructions with arbitrary bit lengths, so they have no connection with byte boundaries. The AGC doesn't have shift instructions but special memory locations that shift values you store there. In comparison, the 8086 is a pretty middle-of-the-road processor.
- moloch-hai 4y agoI should have been clearer. The convoluted, complex corner cases might have been justified if they made the product better for its intended users, but the user experience of Intel products has always been much worse than of its competitors.