If the instruction set is changed, the CPU part number should change. In other
words, future extentions should be IMPOSSIBLE. Unused opcodes should execute a
NOP or an instruction that causes the currently executing program to terminate
in a known condition ... HALT? In this way, Pentium-N code running on a
Pentium-(<N) processor does not cause harm. When an instruction set is
expanded, the processor part number should change.
On 09-Nov-97 Ben Pfaff wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> Ted writes:
>> > Someone wondered (as one does) what might possibly happen if you tried
>> > the unassigned codes.
>>
>> It is a bug for a processor to have any unassigned codes.
>
> In what way is it a bug? If all the codes are assigned, then future
> extensions become impossible.
> --
> Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail will receive free 32MB core files!
>
>
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
> Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
