Bootstrappable language

[bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca]

Chuck Guzis wrote:
> Is there any need for any "byte-edness" at all?  Stick with a 
> convenient word size, make it easy to shift and mask out subfields 
> and forget about "bytes".  You get the benefit of being able to 
> address more memory with fewer bits if you stick to word addressing.
>
>   
BIg ENDIAN lives on my machine... :)
> I submit that the details of any instruction set over another hardly 
> matters, so long as an instruction set is complete (i.e., there's no 
> "you can't get there from here" situation) and is executed 
> efficiently.  
>
>   
One instruction computers[1]: Compliment and add,  jmp if  negitive
are not exactly popular for some reason... Hmmm
> Cheers,
> Chuck
>
>   

[1] Something like that anyhow.