Re: A patch for linux 2.1.127

[John Kodis <kodis at jagunet dot com>]

On Fri, Nov 13, 1998 at 01:56:22PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:

> > I think we should go farther, and try and set a standard for all
> > assembly languages, and use various subsets of it for most of the
> > instructions on all machines.
> 
> "We've got two standards, oh no lets solve it by having three"
> Please tell me that isnt what you mean

Several years ago, some large organization (the IEEE, IIRC), had a
group working on a standardized assembly language.  My impression was
that they were trying to codify existing practice to simplify teaching
more than they were trying to create yet another assembly language for
production use.

They ended up with something that looked alot like what gas accepts,
and that was a fairly good match for 1980's vintage CPUs.  The need
for CPU-specific extensions was recognized.  The need to handle
HP, Merced, MMX, and other odd instructions was not.

Sorry, no URL.  I can't even find my paper copy anymore.

-- John Kodis.