64 bit Bridge for sale.

imho, buying a chip without an assembler
is like buying a fuel cell powered car.
Since AMD has embraced open source
they should just post their assembler source
and LETS GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD.
Or maybe we should just wait for Intel. If
Intel was smart they would announce x86-64
tomorrow knowing if we have waited this
long, we would wait a liitle longer especially
when jobs and money are scarce.
Why spend money when you can't use it.

On 2 Oct 2003 05:39:09 -0700, (Michael Pell)
wrote:
imho, buying a chip without an assembler
is like buying a fuel cell powered car.
Since AMD has embraced open source
they should just post their assembler source
and LETS GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD.

What, you mean like this:

http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/binutils/

Or maybe like this:

http://www.tortall.net/projects/yasm/releases/

Source code for two assemblers that support AMD64 right there. Or
perhaps you would prefer this:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...9_7044,00.html

Which goes into great detail about how to program for AMD64 chips.

Or maybe we should just wait for Intel. If
Intel was smart they would announce x86-64
tomorrow knowing if we have waited this
long, we would wait a liitle longer especially
when jobs and money are scarce.
Why spend money when you can't use it.

You can't get the software until the hardware is there. The hardware
is here now and software is showing up. Actually, software is showing
up very quickly. There are already three distributions of Linux that
support AMD64 now, SuSE, Redhat and Mandrake. Gentoo has an early
port, and Debian has started a port as well. FreeBSD and NetBSD are
both well along to releasing AMD64 versions of their operating system,
and OpenBSD has started a port. WinXP and Win2003 Server are both in
beta now for AMD64.

For compilers, GCC supports AMD64 now, as does PGI. Microsoft's
Visual Studio for AMD64 is in development to be released alongside the
operating system.

In short, AMD is actually getting VERY good software support for their
new architecture. It's only been 5 months since the first hardware
shipped. Compare that to where most other architectures are in their
first 6 months of release and you'll see that things are looking
fairly good for AMD.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca

imho, buying a chip without an assembler
is like buying a fuel cell powered car.

I think your'e confusing AMD64 with Intel's Itanic (which REALLY is
about as viable as a fuel cell or hydrogen powered vehicle for 99.99%
of users, server use or otherwise).

In article ,
lid says...
On this day of our lord, 2 Oct 2003 05:39:09 -0700,
(Michael Pell) quilled:

imho, buying a chip without an assembler
is like buying a fuel cell powered car.
Since AMD has embraced open source
they should just post their assembler source
and LETS GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD.
Or maybe we should just wait for Intel. If
Intel was smart they would announce x86-64
tomorrow knowing if we have waited this
long, we would wait a liitle longer especially
when jobs and money are scarce.
Why spend money when you can't use it.


Luddite alert!

Actually, X86-64 *is* the 64-bit bridge, and it *is* for sale.
Go figure this thread!? ...and your luddite. ;-)

Keith R. Williams wrote in message ...
In article ,
lid says...
On this day of our lord, 2 Oct 2003 05:39:09 -0700,
(Michael Pell) quilled:

imho, buying a chip without an assembler
is like buying a fuel cell powered car.
Since AMD has embraced open source
they should just post their assembler source
and LETS GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD.
Or maybe we should just wait for Intel. If
Intel was smart they would announce x86-64
tomorrow knowing if we have waited this
long, we would wait a liitle longer especially
when jobs and money are scarce.
Why spend money when you can't use it.


Luddite alert!

Actually, X86-64 *is* the 64-bit bridge, and it *is* for sale.
Go figure this thread!? ...and your luddite. ;-)

I have a cart for you, but there's no horse in sight!
I maintain that if you can write microcode you can write
a macro assembler. Wouldn't you co-develop them.
I don't see how AMD, nor the many vendorsrequired,
can develop products without a professional
grade asembler. I think AMD simply holding out.

Mike

In article ,
says...
Keith R. Williams wrote in message ...
In article ,
lid says...
On this day of our lord, 2 Oct 2003 05:39:09 -0700,
(Michael Pell) quilled:

imho, buying a chip without an assembler
is like buying a fuel cell powered car.
Since AMD has embraced open source
they should just post their assembler source
and LETS GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD.
Or maybe we should just wait for Intel. If
Intel was smart they would announce x86-64
tomorrow knowing if we have waited this
long, we would wait a liitle longer especially
when jobs and money are scarce.
Why spend money when you can't use it.


Luddite alert!

Actually, X86-64 *is* the 64-bit bridge, and it *is* for sale.
Go figure this thread!? ...and your luddite. ;-)

I have a cart for you, but there's no horse in sight!

Are you *seriously* trying to say that there are no x86-64
compilers available? Or are you simply ****ing in your shoes
because you can't get your fav assembler?

I maintain that if you can write microcode you can write
a macro assembler.

What these have to do with each other is a wonder.

Wouldn't you co-develop them.
I don't see how AMD, nor the many vendorsrequired,
can develop products without a professional
grade asembler. I think AMD simply holding out.

I think you're on crack! ...that's what I think.

--
Keith

"Michael Pell" wrote in message
om...
I maintain that if you can write microcode you can write
a macro assembler.

"I do not think that word means what you think it means"...

Wouldn't you co-develop them.

Um - what exactly is it about microcode that makes it so closely related to
an assembler?

I don't see how AMD, nor the many vendorsrequired,
can develop products without a professional
grade asembler. I think AMD simply holding out.

I'll bet you that MS has a 64-bit assembler for internal use, but they don't
see any need to ship it until they have a 64-bit compiler available to the
public. I don't think they give a damn about what you (or I) think. (no
offense intended). :-).

Regards,
Dean


Mike

"Michael Pell" wrote in message
om...
imho, buying a chip without an assembler
is like buying a fuel cell powered car.
Since AMD has embraced open source
they should just post their assembler source
and LETS GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD.
Or maybe we should just wait for Intel. If
Intel was smart they would announce x86-64
tomorrow knowing if we have waited this
long, we would wait a liitle longer especially
when jobs and money are scarce.
Why spend money when you can't use it.

Having read this thread since it's start, I think it's time we go right back
to the start of this thread and figure out what you're actually trying to
say. You're being a bit cryptic about what exactly you're asking here, to
say the least; I think most people are having trouble figuring out your
point. Are you asking whether there are assemblers available for x86-64 (aka
AMD64)? Are you asking whether AMD has published documents about programming
its AMD64? Or are asking whether Intel had the right idea for not embracing
AMD64 yet, because the market isn't there yet?

To answer the questions:
-As others have pointed out to you, there are already plenty of compilers
and assemblers available for AMD64. They are available for Linux & Windows.
-AMD has published plenty of documents in PDF format about the AMD64
instruction set. Just go to www.amd.com.
-I'm not sure what your point about Intel and scarce jobs and money is,
you'll have to explain it to us.

Yousuf Khan

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message . cable.rogers.com...
"Michael Pell" wrote in message
om...
imho, buying a chip without an assembler
is like buying a fuel cell powered car.
Since AMD has embraced open source
they should just post their assembler source
and LETS GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD.
Or maybe we should just wait for Intel. If
Intel was smart they would announce x86-64
tomorrow knowing if we have waited this
long, we would wait a liitle longer especially
when jobs and money are scarce.
Why spend money when you can't use it.

Having read this thread since it's start, I think it's time we go right back
to the start of this thread and figure out what you're actually trying to
say. You're being a bit cryptic about what exactly you're asking here, to
say the least; I think most people are having trouble figuring out your
point. Are you asking whether there are assemblers available for x86-64 (aka
AMD64)? Are you asking whether AMD has published documents about programming
its AMD64? Or are asking whether Intel had the right idea for not embracing
AMD64 yet, because the market isn't there yet?

To answer the questions:
-As others have pointed out to you, there are already plenty of compilers
and assemblers available for AMD64. They are available for Linux & Windows.
-AMD has published plenty of documents in PDF format about the AMD64
instruction set. Just go to www.amd.com.
-I'm not sure what your point about Intel and scarce jobs and money is,
you'll have to explain it to us.

Yousuf Khan

Please give me a url to professional grade x86-64 macro assembler.
From what I've read NASM isn't ready and all I get from YASM is
a window with cursor. Microsoft, Borland don't advertise any and
I think Whatcom disapeared. Why doesn't AMD fill this void.
Right now you'll pay a premium for the motherboard (249.99 in my
neighborhood), memory and cpu. Why not wait 6 months for the premium
to come out of these components.

"Dean Kent" wrote in message om...
"Michael Pell" wrote in message
om...
I maintain that if you can write microcode you can write
a macro assembler.

"I do not think that word means what you think it means"...

microcode tells the cpu how execute opcode. risc instructions have
none and are executed directly.

Wouldn't you co-develop them.

what better time to write an assembler
than when your creating instruction set and pouring over instruction
timing.


Um - what exactly is it about microcode that makes it so closely related to
an assembler?

They both require a lot of smarts and going to need it for testing
anyway!


I don't see how AMD, nor the many vendorsrequired,
can develop products without a professional
grade asembler. I think AMD simply holding out.

I'll bet you that MS has a 64-bit assembler for internal use, but they don't
see any need to ship it until they have a 64-bit compiler available to the
public. I don't think they give a damn about what you (or I) think. (no
offense intended). :-).


I'm sure. I've been told masm 8 is out there but that msg came with
no url.

Regards,
Dean


Mike