Re: Why VAX Was the Ultimate CISC and Not RISC

On 3/11/2025 5:44 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

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.

I still haven't seen any good reason to move to C++.
Uses C, it is effective...
   Some people (at the C people): use C++, it has features...
   Others (at the C++ people): Use Rust, it is less of a trash fire.
Or, stick with C, and avoid both the trash-fire and its "solution".
...