[TUHS] Algol68 vs. C at Bell Labs

Nemo cym224 at gmail.com
Fri Jul 1 06:57:33 AEST 2016

On 30 June 2016 at 15:21, Diomidis Spinellis <dds at aueb.gr> wrote:
> Two factors might had made the choice of 8088 a more practical one for IBM.
> In addition, the 8086 architecture was an extension of the 8080 one, which
> made it easier to make the MS-DOS API compatible with the CP/M one, which
> was used by many popular programs.  This would simplify their porting.  (A
> lot of early IBM PC software was written in assembly language.)

I heard that a lot of the BIOS was a simple-minded translation of
corresponding 8080-assembler.  I believe that; if you look at the
horrible assembler, which was actually printed in the IBM Technical
Manual, you could see that most 8086 extensions were not used.


More information about the TUHS mailing list