Sujet : Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC
De : ldo (at) *nospam* nz.invalid (Lawrence D'Oliveiro)
Groupes : comp.archDate : 11. Mar 2025, 23:44:31
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vqqece$273mt$4@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
User-Agent : Pan/0.162 (Pokrosvk)
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.