7 Mar
2011
7 Mar
'11
4:08 p.m.
In article <4D75738F.1000504 at gmail.com>,
Jules Richardson <jules.richardson99 at gmail.com> writes:
There's quite a bit of documentation on the 7090 on bitsavers; not
sure about the earlier models, though. For the 701 it could be that
shift/add was the best they had at the time. By the time we hit the
7090 I suspect they were doing better things, but I'm by no means any
sort of expert on IBM stuff. I only recently learned about the 7090.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
I don't
think the multiply implementation in the IBM 701 was shift/add
microcode variety. That wouldn't have been very performant for its
intended purpose (scientific computing).
I'll have to have a look online and see if I can find any details. I see
that Booth's algorithm was 1951 - much earlier than I expected and a year
before the 701. I'm not sure when Wallace trees showed up...