Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Introducing "No-Moore's Law"

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 08:20:18 03/06/03

Go up one level in this thread

On March 06, 2003 at 09:37:36, Daniel Clausen wrote:

>On March 05, 2003 at 11:45:20, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>When you don't check the CPUID flags before using certain instructions, you
>>>are the one walking across the street without checking for traffic.
>>You think the average programmer understands that?  I don't think the average
>>programmer even understands assembly language, much less that different
>>processors might have different instruction sets even though they are called
>My native language is not English, but what you (Bob) refer to with 'being
>compatible' is 'being identical' in my book. Saying AMD is not compatible here
>is like saying Non-IE browsers don't parse HTML right. Not parsing HTML right
>(which most of the time is not even HTML really) and not displaying them like IE
>does is not the same thing.
>You're right - for the average user it's the same. (that happens when one
>competitor has such a huge market share...) It shouldn't for the "average
>programmer who programs in assembler though". At least I wouldn't want to work
>with these people in "my" team. ;) Unfortunately (for AMD in this case) the way
>you define it, the only compatible chips can only come from one vendor, and that
>is Intel. Next time, someone will blame AMD-chips because they don't write
>"Intel" on their chips, because that can confuse the "average person" and make
>her think it's not a CPU.

That was the only problem I was trying to point out.  "Compatible" != "_really_
and that's bad for the non-assembly-programmer types, as they have no idea what
the compiler
is doing other than it is producing something that will supposedly execute on
the target

This page took 0.02 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.