From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 02:04:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 02:03:46 -0400 Received: from smarty.smart.net ([207.176.80.102]:38410 "EHLO smarty.smart.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 02:03:28 -0400 From: Rick Hohensee Message-Id: <200107070616.CAA03340@smarty.smart.net> Subject: Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("") To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 02:16:41 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I replied to davem at length but I think I forgot to "reply to all recipients". The gist of it is Forth code density is so high on Forth hardware that things like icaches aren't as important, and the factors involved are entirely different. Like high-performance Forth engines are tiny and draw negligible current. Two URL's... http://forth.gsfc.nasa.gov/ http://www.mindspring.com/chipchuck/forth.html Rick Hohensee www.clienux.com