Comment by mort96
You said "programs will want probably to stay conservative and will implement only the core ISA". I'm saying that the core ISA is very very limited and most programs will want to use more than the core ISA.
You said "programs will want probably to stay conservative and will implement only the core ISA". I'm saying that the core ISA is very very limited and most programs will want to use more than the core ISA.
I genuinely do not understand what part of my comments you take issue with. You said that programs will assume the core RISC-V ISA. I said that no, most programs will assume the existence of some extensions, including integer multiply/divide and floating point.
There are two possibilities here:
* Either I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, and you did not mean that most programs will use only the core ISA.
* Or you're trying to say that integer multiply/divide and floating point is part of the core ISA.
Which one is it?
If it's the first one, could you try to clarify? Because I can't see another way to interpret the phrase "programs will want probably to stay conservative and will implement only the core ISA".
Okay, I’m neither party in this back and forth and I don’t know either of you. I have an idea what the misunderstanding might be, but I could be entirely wrong.
I think sylware doesn’t mean the core ISA exactly, but the core with the standard extensions rather than manufacturer-specific extensions.
What???
Re-read my post, please.
The problem is those machine instructions not bringing much more than the core ISA which do not require an ISA extension.