On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 17:19:09 -0400 Richard Verville <[email protected]> wrote:
:>John Gilmore->There is no need for further assertions that things :>that manifestly do work may not or for something less than clarity :>about, for example, the fact that AMODE(64) code is faster than :>AMODE(31) code.< :>Are you saying that AMODE(64) is faster than AMODE(31) ? If so, why would that be ? Depending on how the box is built, to handle tri-mode may require a check of addresses versus the AMODE on most instructions. There may be a preference to 64 to improve performance in products that are used for benchmarks. Of course, there may be 3 different engines .... -- Binyamin Dissen <[email protected]> http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
