Talk:Processor supplementary capability

Generalize tag
I've added the generalize tag to the article because it has a strong x86-family bias. It really should discuss other processor families in similar detail: what additional capabilities have been added to them; what flag mechanisms are available to detect those facilities; etc. Unfortunately, x86 is the only family I'm familiar enough with to work on. JulesH (talk) 22:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Justify terminology "supplementary"
I worked at Intel for circa 16 years, adding many instructions, but I never heard the term "processor supplementary capability" used. At Intel we called them "processor extensions" or "extension features". Come to think of it, I also worked at AMD and MIPS and Nvidia, and again never heard the term "supplementary" used, but just "extensions" and "features". Perhaps "processor supplementary capability" is used in some academic literature, but it might be useful to use the standard terminology used by many companies. And if this term is used by some companies, it might be useful indicating who. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.Glew (talk • contribs) 23:24, 4 February 2020 (UTC)