| Loongson 3A5000? [message #407443] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 11:57  |
|
|
Originally posted by: gareth evans
AIUI this is a new ISA that does not tread on the
patents of ARM, X86 and MIPS.
I've googled unsuccessfully so any pointers
to this ISA?
(As always, real computer scientists program
in assembler :-) )
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407447 is a reply to message #407443] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 13:01  |
|
|
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig
(x-post, f-up).
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> schrieb:
> AIUI this is a new ISA that does not tread on the
> patents of ARM, X86 and MIPS.
>
> I've googled unsuccessfully so any pointers
> to this ISA?
>
> (As always, real computer scientists program
> in assembler :-) )
Maybe this question would be better answered in comp.arch?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407450 is a reply to message #407443] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 13:28 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5563
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-04-22, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
> AIUI this is a new ISA that does not tread on the
> patents of ARM, X86 and MIPS.
>
> I've googled unsuccessfully so any pointers
> to this ISA?
>
> (As always, real computer scientists program
> in assembler :-) )
As opposed to the CS weenies for whom the higher-level the
language, the better? That's why I dropped out of university
and found work in the Real World [tm].
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407452 is a reply to message #407450] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 13:43 |
scott
Messages: 4380
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
> On 2021-04-22, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> AIUI this is a new ISA that does not tread on the
>> patents of ARM, X86 and MIPS.
>>
>> I've googled unsuccessfully so any pointers
>> to this ISA?
>>
>> (As always, real computer scientists program
>> in assembler :-) )
>
> As opposed to the CS weenies for whom the higher-level the
> language, the better?
This seems to paint with far to broad of a brush.
> That's why I dropped out of university
> and found work in the Real World [tm].
I challenge anyone to write and maintain a modern
and useful real-world application in assembler. Most
programmers realized that higher level languages were
to be preferred around the time of the first COBOL report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407461 is a reply to message #407452] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 16:20 |
|
|
Originally posted by: gareth evans
On 22/04/2021 18:43, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>> On 2021-04-22, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> AIUI this is a new ISA that does not tread on the
>>> patents of ARM, X86 and MIPS.
>>>
>>> I've googled unsuccessfully so any pointers
>>> to this ISA?
>>>
>>> (As always, real computer scientists program
>>> in assembler :-) )
>>
>> As opposed to the CS weenies for whom the higher-level the
>> language, the better?
>
> This seems to paint with far to broad of a brush.
>
>> That's why I dropped out of university
>> and found work in the Real World [tm].
>
> I challenge anyone to write and maintain a modern
> and useful real-world application in assembler. Most
> programmers realized that higher level languages were
> to be preferred around the time of the first COBOL report.
>
If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
subject to execution environmental considerations such as
speed for realtime systems.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407464 is a reply to message #407461] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 17:38 |
scott
Messages: 4380
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> writes:
> On 22/04/2021 18:43, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>> On 2021-04-22, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> AIUI this is a new ISA that does not tread on the
>>>> patents of ARM, X86 and MIPS.
>>>>
>>>> I've googled unsuccessfully so any pointers
>>>> to this ISA?
>>>>
>>>> (As always, real computer scientists program
>>>> in assembler :-) )
>>>
>>> As opposed to the CS weenies for whom the higher-level the
>>> language, the better?
>>
>> This seems to paint with far to broad of a brush.
>>
>>> That's why I dropped out of university
>>> and found work in the Real World [tm].
>>
>> I challenge anyone to write and maintain a modern
>> and useful real-world application in assembler. Most
>> programmers realized that higher level languages were
>> to be preferred around the time of the first COBOL report.
>>
>
> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>
> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
> work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
> subject to execution environmental considerations such as
> speed for realtime systems.
>
At 100x the development cost, and with a much larger potential
for error.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407466 is a reply to message #407461] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 17:53 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4946
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
> work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
It makes you wonder why people spend so much time on language
design doesn't it. Personally I'd hate to write a kernel module in COBOL,
a payroll package in Prolog, a web browser in Forth or a boot loader in
JavaScript.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407468 is a reply to message #407443] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 19:09 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Owen Rees
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:57:43 +0100, gareth evans
<headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote in <s5s6e6$2ae$1@dont-email.me>:
> AIUI this is a new ISA that does not tread on the
> patents of ARM, X86 and MIPS.
>
> I've googled unsuccessfully so any pointers
> to this ISA?
LoongArch seems to be a possibly useful search term but the pages that
the links suggest are more detailed seem to be all in Chinese (which I
do not speak or read).
>
> (As always, real computer scientists program
> in assembler :-) )
Real computer scientists write compilers in order to avoid having to
write in assembly language.
When a program I had written in C for a Motorola 68000 based machine was
not as fast as I wanted I did some work on the optimisation phase of the
compiler to make better use of the addressing modes rather than
rewriting any significant part in assembler. (There are 8 lines of
assembler - a function that makes a system call not available in the
runtime library that I got with the compiler.)
As is usually the case, time spent improving the data structures and
algorithms was far more useful that recoding in assembly language would
have been.
The more extreme computer scientists write binary translators so that
the processor with the new architecture can run code compiled (or
written in assembler) for a different architecture. Including binary
translation into the new processor architecture - presumably for
Just-In-Time translation - seems a bit crazy to me but the descriptions
I have seen suggest that LoongArch does that.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407472 is a reply to message #407461] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 23:51 |
greenaum
Messages: 57
Registered: February 2011
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern"
even an intelligible concept?
> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
> work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
Beyond a certain point, any attempt to fix errors would only introduce more errors. You could not write the majority of stuff on
most people's desktops in asm. That's why we have compilers. If we were to assume, hypothetically, that a team of thousands spend
many years on speccing out and planning a program to the point that it COULD be written in asm, then those specs themselves will
essentially just be some new programming language. The specs and plans would need systems of writing to be designed, just to be
able to write them consistently and logically. They would need paradigms and their own verbiage. A language.
And it'd STILL fuck up the more you tried to fix it. A moonshot would be simpler.
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
if love is a drug, then, ideally, it's a healing, healthful drug... it's
kind of like prozac is supposed to work (without the sexual side
effects and long-term damage to the brain and psyche)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407473 is a reply to message #407451] |
Thu, 22 April 2021 23:55 |
greenaum
Messages: 57
Registered: February 2011
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 17:39:05 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) sprachen:
> Loongson is an indiginous architecture designed in
> China.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongson
All the stuff on that page is MIPS. Notably that page doesn't mention the 3A5000. If I had to guess I'd guess MIPS too, but I
suppose OP could have guessed himself if that's all he wanted.
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
if love is a drug, then, ideally, it's a healing, healthful drug... it's
kind of like prozac is supposed to work (without the sexual side
effects and long-term damage to the brain and psyche)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407481 is a reply to message #407472] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 07:51 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3899
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
greenaum@gmail.com writes:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans
> <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>
>> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
>> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>
> I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual
> definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern" even
> an intelligible concept?
>
>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will work well
>> irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>
> Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
X86 Assembler seems like a difficult language to use.
HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
to read and write as any high level language.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407484 is a reply to message #407481] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 09:22 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> schrieb:
> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
> to read and write as any high level language.
What I find most difficult in writing assembler is to remember which
register contains which variable at any given time.
Does HLASM help there?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407485 is a reply to message #407466] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 09:30 |
|
|
Originally posted by: gareth evans
On 22/04/2021 22:53, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100
> gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
>> work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>
> It makes you wonder why people spend so much time on language
> design doesn't it. Personally I'd hate to write a kernel module in COBOL,
> a payroll package in Prolog, a web browser in Forth or a boot loader in
> JavaScript.
>
As I said in closing, except for environmental considerations.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407486 is a reply to message #407472] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 09:33 |
|
|
Originally posted by: gareth evans
On 23/04/2021 04:51, greenaum@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>
>> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
>> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>
> I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern"
> even an intelligible concept?
>
>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
>> work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>
> Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
>
> Beyond a certain point, any attempt to fix errors would only introduce more errors. You could not write the majority of stuff on
> most people's desktops in asm. That's why we have compilers. If we were to assume, hypothetically, that a team of thousands spend
> many years on speccing out and planning a program to the point that it COULD be written in asm, then those specs themselves will
> essentially just be some new programming language. The specs and plans would need systems of writing to be designed, just to be
> able to write them consistently and logically. They would need paradigms and their own verbiage. A language.
>
> And it'd STILL fuck up the more you tried to fix it. A moonshot would be simpler.
OK, so you admit to being an incompetent assembly language programmer.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407487 is a reply to message #407481] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 09:56 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8608
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> greenaum@gmail.com writes:
>
>> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans
>> <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>>
>>> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
>>> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>>
>> I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual
>> definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern" even
>> an intelligible concept?
>>
>>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will work well
>>> irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>>
>> Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
>
> X86 Assembler seems like a difficult language to use.
>
> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
> to read and write as any high level language.
>
+1
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407488 is a reply to message #407484] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 09:56 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8608
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> schrieb:
>
>> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
>> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
>> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
>> to read and write as any high level language.
>
> What I find most difficult in writing assembler is to remember which
> register contains which variable at any given time.
>
> Does HLASM help there?
>
It gives you a cross-reference if register usage.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407489 is a reply to message #407484] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 09:59 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3899
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> writes:
> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> schrieb:
>
>> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
>> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
>> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
>> to read and write as any high level language.
>
> What I find most difficult in writing assembler is to remember which
> register contains which variable at any given time.
>
> Does HLASM help there?
You can equate a register number to a register function, but that way
lies madness. Better to use DSECTS and USING so that you're not
referring to registers that often. Also set aside registers as work
registers not holding values over long stretches of code. For example,
use R1 to increment a counter, store the counter then use it for
something else.
The last code I supported would signal which registers it was using
at subroutine entry then drop those registers at subroutine exit. So the
registers in use were locally visible.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407491 is a reply to message #407481] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 10:47 |
scott
Messages: 4380
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> writes:
> greenaum@gmail.com writes:
>
>> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans
>> <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>>
>>> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
>>> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>>
>> I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual
>> definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern" even
>> an intelligible concept?
>>
>>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will work well
>>> irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>>
>> Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
>
> X86 Assembler seems like a difficult language to use.
It is not difficult to use in any modern incarnation (post 80286),
it is quite straightforward. Just as much as any other macro
assembler for any other architecture, including z-series.
>
> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
> maintained and enhanced.
That were written decades ago. There are very few, if any,
new applications written in HLASM.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407492 is a reply to message #407488] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 10:47 |
scott
Messages: 4380
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>
>>> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
>>> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
>>> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
>>> to read and write as any high level language.
>>
>> What I find most difficult in writing assembler is to remember which
>> register contains which variable at any given time.
>>
>> Does HLASM help there?
>>
>
> It gives you a cross-reference if register usage.
at the end of a paper listing, no doubt.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407493 is a reply to message #407473] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 10:51 |
scott
Messages: 4380
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
greenaum@gmail.com writes:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 17:39:05 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) sprachen:
>
>> Loongson is an indiginous architecture designed in
>> China.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongson
>
> All the stuff on that page is MIPS. Notably that page doesn't mention the 3A5000. If I had to guess I'd guess MIPS too, but I
> suppose OP could have guessed himself if that's all he wanted.
>
Most of the articles I've seen indicate that it is still MIPS64. Some recent
articles (mostly translated from Chinese) tout a "new architecture". My
suspicion is that means a new "micro-architecture" rather than a new ISA.
We'll see when the Linley group (Microprocessor Report) cover it and when
Loongson make a presentation at the next Hot Chips conference at Stanford.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407494 is a reply to message #407488] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 12:07 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3899
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>
>>> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
>>> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
>>> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
>>> to read and write as any high level language.
>>
>> What I find most difficult in writing assembler is to remember which
>> register contains which variable at any given time.
>>
>> Does HLASM help there?
>>
>
> It gives you a cross-reference if register usage.
That's helpful too.
So is only using 1 base register for executable code so you don't tie up
all your registers.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407495 is a reply to message #407492] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 12:10 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3899
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>
>>>> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
>>>> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
>>>> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
>>>> to read and write as any high level language.
>>>
>>> What I find most difficult in writing assembler is to remember which
>>> register contains which variable at any given time.
>>>
>>> Does HLASM help there?
>>>
>>
>> It gives you a cross-reference if register usage.
>
> at the end of a paper listing, no doubt.
No, embedded in your online listing.
I didn't have to refer to it much since I did all my editing with Emacs
on a Linux system so I could find registers pretty quickly. But if I
needed to spot a register that hadn't been used yet, the cross reference
was a good place to go.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407496 is a reply to message #407491] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 12:16 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3899
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> writes:
>> greenaum@gmail.com writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans
>>> <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>>>
>>>> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
>>>> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>>>
>>> I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual
>>> definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern" even
>>> an intelligible concept?
>>>
>>>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will work well
>>>> irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>>>
>>> Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
>>
>> X86 Assembler seems like a difficult language to use.
>
> It is not difficult to use in any modern incarnation (post 80286),
> it is quite straightforward. Just as much as any other macro
> assembler for any other architecture, including z-series.
Yeah I said "seems". Not much experience with MASM. I think the
last time this came up someone mentioned structured macros for MASM.
My bias is probably based on what I'm more familiar with.
>> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
>> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
>> maintained and enhanced.
>
> That were written decades ago. There are very few, if any,
> new applications written in HLASM.
Entire new applications, probably true.
When you're dealing with a large application already written in
Assembler and you need to add modules, sometimes Assembler is
the easiest choice.
I'm retired about 5 years now, but back then I was frequently writing
new stuff in HLASM.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407498 is a reply to message #407496] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 12:48 |
scott
Messages: 4380
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> writes:
> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>
>> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> writes:
>>> greenaum@gmail.com writes:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans
>>>> <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>>>>
>>>> >If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
>>>> >written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>>>>
>>>> I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual
>>>> definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern" even
>>>> an intelligible concept?
>>>>
>>>> >A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will work well
>>>> >irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>>>>
>>>> Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
>>>
>>> X86 Assembler seems like a difficult language to use.
>>
>> It is not difficult to use in any modern incarnation (post 80286),
>> it is quite straightforward. Just as much as any other macro
>> assembler for any other architecture, including z-series.
>
> Yeah I said "seems". Not much experience with MASM. I think the
> last time this came up someone mentioned structured macros for MASM.
> My bias is probably based on what I'm more familiar with.
There were assemblers for x86 pre-microsoft, and the x86 unix
assemblers (and GNU gas) are quite powerful.
But, the main point was that post-286, segmentation wasn't a
condideration for assembler programmers - the address space
was a flat 32-bit space which made data layout much easier
and eliminated the use of segment registers.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407499 is a reply to message #407472] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 13:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
On 23/04/2021 3:51 am, greenaum@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>
>> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
>> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>
> I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern"
> even an intelligible concept?
>
>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
>> work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>
> Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
>
> Beyond a certain point, any attempt to fix errors would only introduce more errors. You could not write the majority of stuff on
> most people's desktops in asm. That's why we have compilers. If we were to assume, hypothetically, that a team of thousands spend
> many years on speccing out and planning a program to the point that it COULD be written in asm, then those specs themselves will
> essentially just be some new programming language. The specs and plans would need systems of writing to be designed, just to be
> able to write them consistently and logically. They would need paradigms and their own verbiage. A language.
>
> And it'd STILL fuck up the more you tried to fix it. A moonshot would be simpler.
You do know that most or all of the no$ emulators for Windows are
written in assembler, by one person?
https://problemkaputt.de/index.htm
Just because /you/ can't develop and maintain things in asm, doesn't
mean other people can't. I am not sure I want to, or can do it even
so.
--
Johann | email: invalid -> com | www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | twitter: @myrkraverk
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407500 is a reply to message #407492] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 14:12 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8608
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>
>>>> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
>>>> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
>>>> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
>>>> to read and write as any high level language.
>>>
>>> What I find most difficult in writing assembler is to remember which
>>> register contains which variable at any given time.
>>>
>>> Does HLASM help there?
>>>
>>
>> It gives you a cross-reference if register usage.
>
> at the end of a paper listing, no doubt.
>
>
How else should it do it? Few listings are actual dead trees these days,
anyway.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407501 is a reply to message #407494] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 14:12 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8608
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>
>>>> HLASM (IBM mainframes) on the other hand is relatively easy to use and
>>>> there are loads of large applications written in HLASM that are actively
>>>> maintained and enhanced. With a good macro package it's just about as easy
>>>> to read and write as any high level language.
>>>
>>> What I find most difficult in writing assembler is to remember which
>>> register contains which variable at any given time.
>>>
>>> Does HLASM help there?
>>>
>>
>> It gives you a cross-reference if register usage.
>
> That's helpful too.
> So is only using 1 base register for executable code so you don't tie up
> all your registers.
>
Right. It’s rarely necessary, if you write modular code, to write a module
bigger than 4K.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407505 is a reply to message #407472] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 16:30 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5563
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-04-23, greenaum@gmail.com <greenaum@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans
> <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>
>> If there were historically "modern" (for their times) applications
>> written in assembler then your challenge is meaningless.
>
> I think he meant "modern" as in for THESE times, or the usual
> definition of "modern". He's bang right. Is "historically modern"
> even an intelligible concept?
Perhaps a better word would be "contemporary".
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407506 is a reply to message #407489] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 16:30 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5563
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-04-23, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> You can equate a register number to a register function, but that way
> lies madness. Better to use DSECTS and USING so that you're not
> referring to registers that often. Also set aside registers as work
> registers not holding values over long stretches of code. For example,
> use R1 to increment a counter, store the counter then use it for
> something else.
Registers 15, 0, and 1 are great for BXLE loops.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407507 is a reply to message #407466] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 16:30 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5563
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-04-22, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100
> gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
>> work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>
> It makes you wonder why people spend so much time on language
> design doesn't it. Personally I'd hate to write a kernel module in COBOL,
> a payroll package in Prolog, a web browser in Forth or a boot loader in
> JavaScript.
A friend once wrote an 8080 assembler in COBOL. It ran rings
around Univac's assembler - which was written in Fortran.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407508 is a reply to message #407481] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 16:30 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5563
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-04-23, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> greenaum@gmail.com writes:
>
>> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100, gareth evans
>> <headstone255@yahoo.com> sprachen:
>>
>>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will work well
>>> irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>>
>> Dude do you even know what assembler IS?
>
> X86 Assembler seems like a difficult language to use.
That's what nudged me away from assembly language programming.
Fortunately, C came along at just the right time.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407509 is a reply to message #407503] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 16:42 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5563
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-04-23, Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> schrieb:
>
>> Few listings are actual dead trees these days,
>> anyway.
>
> That is one of the few things I miss about mainframes - the output
> on large continuous form paper with green bars (so as not to confuse
> different lines) and a decent number of columns.
For me, that problem went away once screen resolution went beyond VGA.
One of my always-open CLI windows is 80 columns wide by the height of
the screen (50-something lines). If I expand it to full screen it's
much wider than the 132 characters we got on paper.
I was lucky enough to work in a shop whose standard was 8 1/2 x 14
paper at 8 lines per inch (which green bars made readable), and I
later persuaded several other shops to switch. It was much easier
to spread out a couple of listings on your desk, and it actually got
two more lines per page than 11-inch-deep paper at 6 lpi. And, you
could file it in standard legal-size file folders and cabinets,
rather than spending big bucks on fancy stuff from Wright Line.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407510 is a reply to message #407443] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 17:58 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 9:57:59 AM UTC-6, gareth evans wrote:
> AIUI this is a new ISA that does not tread on the
> patents of ARM, X86 and MIPS.
>
> I've googled unsuccessfully so any pointers
> to this ISA?
What I read about the Loongson 3A5000 is indeed that the ISA
is novel, not involving ISA from MIPS or Alpha, but it also mentioned
that this new ISA was only, for now, shared with select Loongsoon
business partners: it has _not_ yet been made public. So, unless there
is a leak, you won't find it on the Internet.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407514 is a reply to message #407485] |
Fri, 23 April 2021 20:21 |
Richard Thiebaud
Messages: 222
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 4/23/21 9:30 AM, gareth evans wrote:
> On 22/04/2021 22:53, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:20:43 +0100
>> gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A well-designed and properly thought-out program design will
>>> work well irrespective of the language in which it is coded,
>>
>> It makes you wonder why people spend so much time on language
>> design doesn't it. Personally I'd hate to write a kernel module in COBOL,
>> a payroll package in Prolog, a web browser in Forth or a boot loader in
>> JavaScript.
>>
>
> As I said in closing, except for environmental considerations.
All programs have environment consideration.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407525 is a reply to message #407499] |
Sat, 24 April 2021 06:34 |
Niklas Karlsson
Messages: 282
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-04-23, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
>
> You do know that most or all of the no$ emulators for Windows are
> written in assembler, by one person?
An emulator is probably a pretty good use-case for assembly language.
Try an office suite, IDE, or such.
Niklas
--
If C++ had only intended to solve the problems of C, it would have stopped
getting worse a long, long time ago. No such luck appears to obtain.
-- Garrett Wollman
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407530 is a reply to message #407525] |
Sat, 24 April 2021 12:26 |
scott
Messages: 4380
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Niklas Karlsson <nikke.karlsson@gmail.com> writes:
> On 2021-04-23, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> You do know that most or all of the no$ emulators for Windows are
>> written in assembler, by one person?
>
> An emulator is probably a pretty good use-case for assembly language.
> Try an office suite, IDE, or such.
I disagree. Vehemently. I write "emulators" for a living. Our current
emulator (for a very large System-On-Chip[*]) runs over 2 million SLOC
of C++ (with small amounts of C and Python). It's also highly multithreaded
for performance.
Writing that in assembler would take decades, and it would be impossible
to support and you'd never find enough qualified programmers that didn't
need extensive training before being useful.
We need to have the emulator working in advance of silicon availability
to allow OS, device driver developers and customers to prepare their
software so it is ready when they get the first silicon, so development
time is a key priority.
[*] Many ARMv8+ cores, bunches of DSP cores, packet processing coprocessors
including hardware crypto for AES, SHA (up through SHA512), SM3,
ECC et alia and hardware network controller supporting RSS, traffic shaping,
and protocol tunnelling, USB controllers, SATA controllers, MMC controllers,
SPI, I2C, I3C and GPIO controllers, cryptographically secure
random number generators, PCI Express controllers and a host of other features.
Takes a couple of minutes to boot SMP linux kernel on the emulator
to a busybox prompt; performance is a major consideration.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Loongson 3A5000? [message #407532 is a reply to message #407530] |
Sat, 24 April 2021 14:18 |
|
|
Originally posted by: gareth evans
On 24/04/2021 17:26, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Niklas Karlsson <nikke.karlsson@gmail.com> writes:
>> On 2021-04-23, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> You do know that most or all of the no$ emulators for Windows are
>>> written in assembler, by one person?
>>
>> An emulator is probably a pretty good use-case for assembly language.
>> Try an office suite, IDE, or such.
>
> I disagree. Vehemently. I write "emulators" for a living. Our current
> emulator (for a very large System-On-Chip[*]) runs over 2 million SLOC
> of C++ (with small amounts of C and Python). It's also highly multithreaded
> for performance.
>
> Writing that in assembler would take decades,
How long did it take in the languages that you cited?
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
