The three-operand form of IMUL also already existed on those processors.
>This wasn't just an incremental upgrade—it was the foundation that would carry the PC architecture for decades to come.
AI?
The three-operand form of IMUL also already existed on those processors.
>This wasn't just an incremental upgrade—it was the foundation that would carry the PC architecture for decades to come.
AI?
Probably not; this point is well justified by both theory and practice. Supporting suitably larger operands is indeed what naturally comes following the increase of computation demands.
One point I do differ from the author is that register width don't necessarily correlate with the size of address space. Even 8bit machines can address a large space by splitting apart the logical address and using multiple registers. Likewise, having a wide register does not imply the same address width.
This use of sloppy terms shouldn't make us forget that they are using an address extension trick, just like all those 16 bit processors that wanted to go beyond 64KB (for byte addressed such as the PDP-11, Z8000 or 8086) or 128KB (for word addressed, like the Xerox Alto's modified Data General Nova model).