Re: To RISC or not to RISC

Betov kirjoitti:

I though exactly this the day i saw how the x86-64bits
was organized. But, as you say, this is going that way
since a long time: It was already like this with the
introduction of the Enter/Leave instructions.


Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >


Yes, enter/leave construction... So assembly language has to be the
"flexible partner". But I think it's good to have those instructions
implemented in silicon, by the way. After all, it's us asm programmers
who win in that situation :) Think about it... high level languages
have no opportunity to choose how much space to allocate when entering
subroutines. If C function calls another one, it's allways the same...
if for example two ints are passed as params, in 32 bit it's 8 bytes on
stack. But in assembly one can allocate casually for example 8
additional bytes more if needed, using enter. Of course the calling
routine does not know that, but it's possible. Well... what I
particularly like in assembly is that you can define your own calling
conventions, they are not static as in C or generally in HLL.
Parameters passed in registers and all that. Flexibility is the keyword.

.