Post by thread:words vs. bytes (was Re: LED mvong message.)

BillW wrote: > Not to detract from your conclusions, but aren't you leaving out "effective > address fetch time" or something? I have a hard time believing that any > processor can fetch twice as many bytes in its instruction stream and > maintain the same execution time... Not sure about the 8051, but that is common on other processors. On the 6502, many one and two byte instructions have the same execution time (two cycles). Eric

>Not sure about the 8051, but that is common on other processors. On the >6502, many one and two byte instructions have the same execution time >(two cycles). WOW!!! Someone else remembers the 6502!? Ah, the days of the VIC20... "DOS Computers manufactured by companies such as IBM, Compaq, Tandy, and millions of others are by far the most popular, with about 70 million machines in use wordwide. Macintosh fans, on the other hand, may note that cockroaches are far more numerous than humans, and that numbers alone do not denote a higher life form."

On Tue, 5 Nov 1996, Matthew Mucker wrote: > WOW!!! Someone else remembers the 6502!? Ah, the days of the VIC20... I can't resist mentioning that I have a 6501 lurking in a dusty drawer. :-)

"Martin J. Maney" <spam_OUTmaneyTakeThisOuTMCS.NET> wrote: > I can't resist mentioning that I have a 6501 lurking in a dusty drawer. I've got a 6501. And a 6502 that is early enough that it doesn't have the ROR instruction, which was added in September of 1975. But I've rewritten most of the embedded system code I originally wrote for the 6502 and the Mitsubishi 8-bit parts (6502-like) to run on the PIC. Cheers, Eric

>I've got a 6501. And a 6502 that is early enough that it doesn't have the >ROR instruction, which was added in September of 1975. And I thought I was proud because I have the second 386sx built by Intel in my drawer! myke Avoiding precedents does not mean nothing should ever be done. It only means that nothing should ever be done for the first time - Sir Humphrey Appleby K.C.B.