Jim Battle wrote:
Chris Kennedy wrote:
Which one? We
always seemed to have like four :)
Ron Crandall. When I was at BTI (1985-1986) Ron was the only main SW guy.
Long after my tenure. Ron was one of the very first employees; I'm not
surprised he was one of the last.
When I talked with Ron, he said Tom Poulter (founder
of BTI, and
previously the product manager of the HP 2000, I believe) still had two
8000s and docs and media. Ron said he'd contact Tom for me, but I never
heard anything back.
Has anyone tried pinging Jimbo to see if he has
any stuff hanging about?
You are over my head. I'm not sure who Jimbo is.
Jim Lyon, who was responsible for much of the work that made the
performance of the operating system on the 8000 at least tolerable,
through such heretical concepts as using tables rather than link lists
for process control structures. He left BTI in the early 1980s for
Tandem. Googling "jimbo intercal" should pull up references to him.
Pity he never implemented Intercal for the 8000.
It could have been a
real competitor for Dragon ;)
In 1986, before the big shutdown, there was an optimizing C compiler
that had been written in house. I'm sure it never made it out the door,
though. I can just imagine:
struct {
unsigned int bleb:5;
unsigned int foo:7;
unsigned int bar:11;
} thing;
...
thing.bar += thing.foo;
That probably would have taken two instructions, as the BTI architecture
allowed specifying an operand such as a bitfield of a word at a given
offset from a base register.
Yep. The infamous zig-zag bit mode. You're right, it should have only
taken two instructions to implement that, although they would have been
*slow*.
Not that such cases are performance critical.
Curiously, it's precisely the multitude of addressing modes that made
the 8000 so staggeringly slow. For a machine with a theoretical basic
cycle type of 67ns (I say "theoretical" because it could be changed via
the SCP and most of the early hardware refused to reliably work at those
speeds) it could be quite slow. I recall that increment took more than
a microsecond (largely because it was defined as a memory locking
instruction that thus had to do a dance with the memory controller to
lock out other processors), but there were about half a dozen other ways
to increment a value in a single instruction, some of which were much
faster.
Even today I remain in awe of an ISA that dispensed with shift and
rotate operations in favor of implementing those as side-effects of
addressing modes!
The overall architecture of the machine was really quite elegant; it
just sort of suffered in the details. Since much of the team came from
the same school in Oregon and worked on the same system, the 8000
suffered a classic case of second system syndrome.
--
Chris Kennedy
chris at
mainecoon.com AF6AP
http://www.mainecoon.com PGP KeyID 108DAB97
PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
"Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration..."