Here we go with Microcode again...

From: Doug Yowza <yowza_at_yowza.com>
Date: Wed May 20 20:45:28 1998

On Wed, 20 May 1998, Tony Duell wrote:

> R0:=R0 and not 1,
>
> and
>
> R0:=R0 and (not 1),
>
> are totally different makes life interesting. They both do the same
> thing, but the second one can't always be used. If anyone wants an
> explanation, please ask.

OK, I give up. I would think that the "and" would be an ALU function, but
the "not 1" would be evaluated to a constant by the assembler. Does one
of the "not 1" forms mean that the ALU should perform the operation
(which it couldn't if an op was already scheduled)?

-- Doug
Received on Wed May 20 1998 - 20:45:28 BST