william@syacus.acus.oz.au (William Mason) (06/10/91)
If RISC is *it* ... How come the guy with shor legs can't winn the olympic foot races ??? -- M. Miller (curtsey H. Corte). -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --< today is a better day >-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- _--_|\ William Mason ACSnet: william@syacus.acus.OZ / ACUS \ Aust. Ctr. Unisys S/w Internet: william@syacus.acus.OZ.AU \_.--._/ Sydney, N.S.W, Voice: +61-2-390-1322
yrjola@hkkk.fi (Matti Yrjola) (06/11/91)
In <1991Jun9.214548.23661@syacus.acus.oz.au> william@syacus.acus.oz.au (William Mason) writes: > If RISC is *it* ... How come the guy with shor legs > can't winn the olympic foot races ??? > -- M. Miller (curtsey H. Corte). >-- Maybe he can`t win, but he will beat the man with the stilts. -- ----------------------------------------------------- I did it M M Y Y Matti Yrjola, Helsinki School of Economics, Computer Center ! MM MM Y Y Runeberginkatu 14-16, 00100 HELSINKI, FINLAND ! M M M Y INTERNET: yrjola@hkkk.fi ! M M waY
lindsay@gandalf.cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) (06/12/91)
In article <1991Jun9.214548.23661@syacus.acus.oz.au> william@syacus.acus.oz.au (William Mason) writes: > If RISC is *it* ... How come the guy with shor legs > can't winn the olympic foot races ??? If long legs are *it*, how come you can't run faster than my dog? -- Don D.C.Lindsay Carnegie Mellon Robotics Institute
abaum (Allen Baum) (06/13/91)
(Donald Lindsay) writes: >In article <1991Jun9.214548.23661@syacus.acus.oz.au> >(William Mason) writes: >>If RISC is *it* ... How come the guy with short legs >>can't winn the olympic foot races ??? > >If long legs are *it*, how come you can't run faster than my dog? > Because dogs are superscalar, er, superpedal? ****************************************************** Allen J. Baum baum@apple.com ******************************************************
mshute@cs.man.ac.uk (Malcolm Shute) (06/14/91)
In article <13395@pt.cs.cmu.edu> lindsay@gandalf.cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes: >In article <1991Jun9.214548.23661@syacus.acus.oz.au> > william@syacus.acus.oz.au (William Mason) writes: >> If RISC is *it* ... How come the guy with shor legs >> can't winn the olympic foot races ??? >If long legs are *it*, how come you can't run faster than my dog? Does this mean that we should be measuring 'Leg-Complexity', not 'Leg'. -- Malcolm SHUTE. (The AM Mollusc: v_@_ ) Disclaimer: all
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (06/15/91)
In article <1991Jun9.214548.23661@syacus.acus.oz.au>, william@syacus.acus.oz.au (William Mason) writes: > If RISC is *it* ... How come the guy with shor legs > can't winn the olympic foot races ??? > -- M. Miller (curtsey H. Corte). Maybe not, but he sure kicks butt in the sack race. And with compilers being what they are, that's the race that counts. -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (06/15/91)
In article <195@armltd.uucp>, abaum (Allen Baum) writes: > (Donald Lindsay) writes: > >In article <1991Jun9.214548.23661@syacus.acus.oz.au> > >(William Mason) writes: > >>If RISC is *it* ... How come the guy with short legs > >>can't winn the olympic foot races ??? > >If long legs are *it*, how come you can't run faster than my dog? > Because dogs are superscalar, er, superpedal? OK, so how come a cheetah is faster than a horse? It's superpipelined! And a kangaroo has fewer processors but uses a bigger cache... -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) (06/15/91)
In article <BC-BR@xds13.ferranti.com>, peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes: |> [...] |> OK, so how come a cheetah is faster than a horse? It's superpipelined! |> And a kangaroo has fewer processors but uses a bigger cache... The cheetah is a RISC architecture. It contains nothing that isn't needed to run fast or to kill. The horse is also RISCish, but is optimized for longer distance running. Nature contains very few CISC architectures. The kangaroo was designed by committee (like the platypus and several other species from down under. J. Giles
sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) (06/16/91)
In article <25734@lanl.gov> jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes: >The cheetah is a RISC architecture. It contains nothing that isn't >needed to run fast or to kill. >Nature contains very few CISC architectures. By that definition, then, H. Sap. is a CISC. Far more frontal lobes than we would need merely to survive, organs we no longer need (appendix, for example, and note that this causes lots of problems), teeth which, although they seemed a good idea when designed, were implemented poorly and are thus causing problems for future generations of the architecture (wisdom teeth, anybody?). Nature contains *lots* of "CISC architectures," in that there are lots of things ("features") most organisms could live quite well without. (Why do male mammals have nipples?) The most successful organisms on this planet are the "simple" ones: insects. -- Sean Eric Fagan | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it; sef@kithrup.COM | I had a bellyache at the time." -----------------+ -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_) Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.
jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) (06/17/91)
In article <1991Jun15.224614.10258@kithrup.COM> sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: > The most successful organisms on this planet are the "simple" ones: > insects. Ahh yes, but the mammals have all their capabilities in EEPROM. Some of the more advanced mammals (us???? maybe) have them in SRAM. I think most insects are still using old fashioned ROM that has to be burnt in at the design stage. No hopes of upgradability there. :-) On the other hand, having your source code in hardened ROM does allow the insects to be very resistant against ultraviolet and other types of radiation. I don't think that the Designer is coming out with a properly shielded mammal species yet (armadillo 2000?). - jiro nakamura jiro@shaman.com -- Jiro Nakamura jiro@shaman.com Shaman Consulting (607) 256-5125 VOICE "Bring your dead, dying shamans here!" (607) 277-1440 FAX/Data
ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) (06/17/91)
In article <1991Jun15.224614.10258@kithrup.COM>, sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: > By that definition, then, H. Sap. is a CISC. Far more frontal lobes than we > would need merely to survive, organs we no longer need (appendix, for > example, and note that this causes lots of problems), Beware of using out-of-date manuals, especially manuals not written by the architect. The appendix now functions as part of the immune system. You can manage without, but you're better off if you have it, especially if you are a child. As for frontal lobes, I'm afraid the "low end" models just didn't make it in the market. It's a jungle out there... -- Q: What should I know about quicksort? A: That it is *slow*. Q: When should I use it? A: When you have only 256 words of main storage.
gdtltr@brahms.udel.edu (gdtltr@limbo.org (The Befuddled One)) (06/18/91)
Has anyone else noticed that this thread is getting exceedingly silly?
Gary Duzan
Time Lord
Third Regeneration
--
gdtltr@brahms.udel.edu
_o_ ---------------------- _o_
[|o o|] To be is to be networked. [|o o|]
|_o_| Disclaimer: I have no idea what I am talking about. |_o_|jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) (06/18/91)
sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) ponders:
> (Why do male mammals have nipples?)
So you can find your cigarettes when you're drunk -- Martin Mull
It's notable that the fundamental encoding scheme for the genetic code
is extremely simple: four instructions (ATCG). All else is accomplished
in software.
-- Jonmshute@cs.man.ac.uk (Malcolm Shute) (06/18/91)
In article <1991Jun17.043545.5268@shaman.com> jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) writes: >most insects are still using old fashioned ROM that has to be burnt >in at the design stage. No hopes of upgradability there. :-) But new upgrades *are* still coming on to the market... every few aeons. Trillions are manufactured in each batch... (disposable insects). -- Malcolm SHUTE. (The AM Mollusc: v_@_ ) Disclaimer: all
als@bohra.cpg.oz.au (Anthony Shipman) (06/18/91)
In article <25734@lanl.gov>, jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes: ............ > The kangaroo was designed by committee (like the platypus and several > other species from down under. An expert committee I'll have you know. Just check the efficiency of that leg machinery. -- Anthony Shipman "You've got to be taught before it's too late, Computer Power Group Before you are six or seven or eight, 19 Cato St., East Hawthorn, To hate all the people your relatives hate, Melbourne, Australia You've got to be carefully taught." R&H
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (06/19/91)
In article <25734@lanl.gov>, jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes: > The kangaroo was designed by committee (like the platypus and several > other species from down under. I disagree strongly. The kangaroo is a very efficient design, and uses far less energy in motion than any other biped and most quadrupeds. On each bounce, kinetic energy is converted to mechanical energy in the muscles of the kangaroo's legs, and then back to kinetic energy with a little extra chemical energy to make up for losses. I know that a human on a bicycle is more efficient. I don't know of anything else that does as good a job, but I don't recall the article offhand. I think it was in an old Scientific American... Now the Kangaroo's reproductive system is a bit of a kludge, but that's not what's being discussed here. An analogy would be (as I implied) a small RISC processor with a large cache... -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) (06/19/91)
In article <4V=BO6D@xds13.ferranti.com>, peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes: > I disagree strongly. The kangaroo is a very efficient design, and uses far > less energy in motion than any other biped and most quadrupeds. > Now the Kangaroo's reproductive system is a bit of a kludge, but that's not > what's being discussed here. The kangaroo's reproductive system is also very efficient. In fact, it is a three-stage pipeline, the first stage of which can be stalled. -- Q: What should I know about quicksort? A: That it is *slow*. Q: When should I use it? A: When you have only 256 words of main storage.
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (06/19/91)
In article <6390@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>, ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes: > The kangaroo's reproductive system is also very efficient. > In fact, it is a three-stage pipeline, > the first stage of which can be stalled. Well, it might be pipelined but that third stage takes a long time, plus uses external cache. It's only really efficient if you need to discard intermediate results frequently, and that increases the number of iterations you have to use to get the same product. -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"