[TUHS] SPARC is CRAPS spelled backwards.

[Paul Winalski]

On 9/24/18, Peter Jeremy <peter at rulingia.com> wrote:
>
> In the specific case of x86, I would dispute that.  The various warts in
> the
> x86 instruction set and "architecture" mean that x86 code density is
> relatively low and on a par with SPARC code.  I agree that the overall
> performance is impressive but that is more a measure of the abilities of
> Intel's engineers than the overall approach.

No doubt about it--x86 instruction encoding is butt-ugly and wasteful,
due to the need for backward compatibility with what was originally an
8-bit architecture.  Does SPARC have the vector instructions that have
been added to x86 over the years?

-Paul W.