Talk:Minimal instruction set computer

multiple not minimal, as in multiple instead of reduced instruction set.


 * OK, there's now a brief mention of "multiple instruction set computer". There seem to be enough references for "minimal instruction set computer" to establish enough notability for this Wikipedia article about them. Are there enough references for "multiple instruction set computer" to establish enough notability to start a Wikipedia article about them? --DavidCary (talk) 05:42, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * That looks like enough references to me. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 17:19, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

So, the main picture of the page is a diagram of an instruction pipeline, but the page clearly says "Instruction pipelines, branch prediction, out-of-order execution, register renaming and speculative execution broadly exclude a CPU from being classified as a MISC architecture system." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam.gausmann (talk • contribs) 23:44, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Good point. I'll delete the irrelevant diagram. KenShirriff (talk) 20:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

How can a processor, the INMOS Transputer, with its *hundreds* of instructions, at all be considered MISC?

Likewise, ILP measurements on MISC architectures seems to explicitly avoid the use of macro-op fusion, where an instruction decoder recognizes patterns of instructions and operates them in parallel. This blurs the distinction between having "multiple instructions run at once" and "supporting a large set of insructions", but MISC has always been about the programmer/hardware interface (just like RISC), *not* about core implementation. Citation definitely needed for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.11.86.22 (talk) 03:52, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Minimal instruction set computer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170202001232/http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=2636672.PN.&OS=PN%2F2636672&RS=PN%2F2636672 to http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=2636672.PN.&OS=PN%2F2636672&RS=PN%2F2636672
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721225302/http://www.intellasys.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=35 to http://www.intellasys.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=35

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Useful reference
This page has a lot of unsourced statements and original research. Gordon Bell's 1986 article "RISC: Back to the future" is one of the early discussions of MISC and would be a useful source of information. Link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259577568

KenShirriff (talk) 23:39, 12 August 2023 (UTC)