Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 22:44:31 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <vqqece$273mt$4@dont-email.me>
References: <vpufbv$4qc5$1@dont-email.me>
	<2025Mar1.232526@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <vq2dfr$2skk$1@gal.iecc.com>
	<2025Mar2.234011@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <5pkg9l-kipt.ln1@msc27.me.uk>
	<2025Mar3.174417@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <vq4qav$1dksd$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq5dm2$1h3mg$5@dont-email.me> <2025Mar4.110420@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<vq829a$232tl$6@dont-email.me> <2025Mar5.083636@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<vqdljd$29f8f$2@paganini.bofh.team> <vqdrh9$3cdrc$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqek6h$3fro6$1@dont-email.me>
	<fe70b48cd6fef0aaf89278163d8b6322@www.novabbs.org>
	<vqfmr4$3npgk$1@dont-email.me> <vqg04o$3p80h$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqgbao$3rbkh$1@dont-email.me>
	<9371fe9be75cdd606c876f539e1d2d78@www.novabbs.org>
	<vqnps4$1j63b$1@dont-email.me>
	<0da86de26bac1912b190793512255aa4@www.novabbs.org>
	<vqo8b1$1ln7o$1@dont-email.me>
	<5e696219dedf30d0095dfd7671a4c87f@www.novabbs.org>
	<vqpuja$22eta$1@dont-email.me> <m3bfusF9ocaU1@mid.individual.net>
	<vqq72r$22et9$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 23:44:31 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fb3f8814a23c1b5929be502852c6d2d1";
	logging-data="2330333"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19KdVAMXATAufpB4wJP+Djc"
User-Agent: Pan/0.162 (Pokrosvk)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:n4Hk1aYTibiriF1i6+r3uTtu8WE=
Bytes: 2519

On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 13:39:55 -0700, Stephen Fuld wrote:

> On 3/11/2025 12:07 PM, moi wrote:
>>
>> No, it is logically a copy.
> 
> While that is true, I don't think anyone is talking about a "copy" op
> code.  :-)  I had thought about mentioning in the software part of the
> argument that COBOL actually has a "move" verb to accomplish that, i.e.
> "Move A to B." even though you are technically right that it is a copy.

There is a language (C++) which has introduced reference operators that 
distinguish between “move semantics” versus “copy semantics”.

No, I haven’t got my head around it either.