I had an identical experience with the REALbasic Cafe as a kid, down to eventually selling a couple of shareware projects. I wonder if we were there at the same time.
I think it would be more like RPN if it used a stack, and operands were specified as relative offsets (i.e., stack offsets). In the version I wrote, operands are still represented as absolute offsets in the expression table.
Hi! This course is about the "middle end," FWIW. We do not do parsing or codegen in 6120, and there is no goal (as there is in many undergrad-level compilers courses) of making a complete, end-to-end compiler for a C-like language.
To slightly refine this, Intel didn't have many "foundry customers" before Altera. Via Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel#Opening_up_the_foundries...), the need to fill up the manufacturing lines was engendered by poor x86 CPU sales around ~2013, not poor third-party fab runs. In 2013, Intel was still ahead of TSMC with 22 nm.
Didn't they also drag down Panasonic or something? I remember there being a lot of rumors of them being an extremely bad partner at the time, basically no technical support, unreliable capacity due to by core business and not giving two shits about the success of the venture in general.
> The diagram shows each core has icache and dcache; what they've ditched is cache coherency.
This is not quite true: the local data memories are not caches, i.e., they do not implicitly move memory in from a more distant tier in the memory hierarchy. They are just plain explicitly managed local memories (sometimes called "scratchpads" to distinguish them from caches).
> However, where it starts to get more interesting is the work done by W. Bastiaan Kleijn from Cornell University Library.
The authors are not from Cornell. I think the author made this mistake because the paper is posted on arXiv, and that’s what’s it says at the top of every page?
