Skip Navigation

The Computer Journal 1989 32(4):370-373; doi:10.1093/comjnl/32.4.370
© 1989 by British Computer Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bennett, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, G. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The Need for Reduced Byte Stream Instruction Sets

J. P. Bennett * and G. C. Smith

School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY, UK

In the design of byte stream instruction sets, a popular methodology has been peephole refinement of a canonical instruction set. By this we mean the addition of extra opcodes over the minimum necessary for a viable machine in order to handle particularly common cases more efficiently. Such machines by the use of ‘escape’ sequences often have hundreds of different opcodes. By comparison, modern ‘Reduced Instruction Set’ computers, which do not take the byte stream approach, have a very small number of opcodes. We argue that in fact there is no significant benefit to be achieved by having byte stream instruction sets of more than around 100 opcodes. A formal basis for the selection of extra opcodes is used in justifying this view.

Received May 1987. revised September 1987.

* School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY

§ To whom correspondence should be addressed.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.