Content deleted Content added
→First sentence is wrong: P-code? MIX? |
→First sentence is wrong: Byte oriented interpreters go back to at least the low end System/360. |
||
Line 154:
:In general, I believe that it is reasonable to describe Pascal P-code and Java byte code as machine languages for abstract machines. Do you not consider [[MIX (abstract machine)|MIX]] to be an instruction set?
:What is the encoding of the P-code for the [[Pascal (programming language)#The Pascal-P system|Pascal-P system]]?
::
::Yes it is strange. Bytecode should apply to any byte oriented instruction encoding, back to (as far as I know) IBM System/360. An important idea behind S/360 was the low-end microcoded machines. That is, ones that interpret the instructions in software. Before S/360, the IBM scientific machines used 36 bit words. Not so many years later, we have VAX, again byte oriented and designed for microcoded processors that interpret the byte codes. VAX followed DEC 36 bit machines, such as the PDP-10. (Seems to be a pattern here.) Once byte addressable machines became popular, byte oriented intermediate code became popular for many different cases. Even more, early in the Java years, Sun had designed and built hardware for running JVM! [[User:Gah4|Gah4]] ([[User talk:Gah4|talk]]) 18:42, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
| |||