Jump to content

Talk:Accumulator (computing): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
move sourcetype category to talk page per discussion using AWB
 
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
Bots
7,153,722 edits
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Computing}}.
 
(14 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
⚫
{{FOLDOC talk}}
{{WikiProject Computing |hardware=y |hardware-importance=}}
}}
⚫
{{FOLDOC}}

== Massive rework needed ==

This is bad, really bad.

First of all this article suggests an accumulator processors has one accumulator (which [[6502]] did). However numerous examples are contrary to this such as
* [[6809]] has accumulators A and B that could be concatenated to D, [[6308]] had even more
* [[56300]] has again 2 large accumulators of extended width
* [[96000]] also has 2 accumulators that are even wider

With 2 accumulators you need only a single bit in the instruction to indicate what accumulator is to be used. [[68000]] has a lot of data registers, and those are not called accumulators, so the article should state clearly where the limit is. Seems the limit is around 4 (ARM Piccolo)

[[SWEET16]] has one accumulator and 15 other registers, a wealth closer to [[68000]].

Next is the link to [[accumulator-based architecture]] which goes to [[PDP-8]], specifically the section ''Legacy_of_accumulator-based_architectures'' which no longer exists. Is there any reason why this has to be split up?

Also it seems a bit lacking that the [[Multiply-accumulate|multiply-and-accumulate]] is not mentioned.

All in all an article in need of an overhaul. --22:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Amended --21:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully such an overhaul will also disambiguate further, since the term "accumulator" in programming applies to a variable in which values are accumulated... [[Special:Contributions/63.249.90.205|63.249.90.205]] ([[User talk:63.249.90.205|talk]]) 00:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Accumulator (computing)]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=677760409 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928031937/http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?code=DRMCRHC16OV&srch=1 to http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?code=DRMCRHC16OV&srch=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier;">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green;">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 10:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

== What is "early" ==

[[Accumulator (computing)#Accumulator machines|#Accumulator machines]] says {{tq|Almost all early computers were accumulator machines with only the high-performance "[[supercomputer]]s" having multiple registers.}} However, the [[IBM 7070]]<ref>{{cite manual
| title = Reference Manual IBM 7070 Data Processing System
| date = January 1960
| edition = Second
| id = A22-7003-01
| url = http://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/7070/A22-7003-01_7070_Reference_Jan60.pdf
| publisher = IBM
}}
</ref> had three accumulators, the [[UNIVAC 1107]]<ref>{{cite manual
| title = Technical Bulletin Bulletin UNIVAC 1107 Central Computer
| id = UT-2463
| date = November 1961
| url = http://bitsavers.org/pdf/univac/1107/UT-2463_CPU_Nov61.pdf
| publisher = Remington Rand Univac division of Sperry Rand
}}
</ref>{{efn|Sperry Rand called them arithmetic registers or A-registers.}} had 16, the [[Digital Equipment Corporation|DEC]] [[PDP-6]]<ref>{{cite manual
| title = Programmed Data Processor-6 Handbook
| id = F65
| date = August 1964
| url = http://bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp6/F-65_PDP-6_Handbook_Aug64.pdf
| publisher = DEC
}}
</ref>{{efn|Storage locations 0-15 served as both accumulators and index registers.}} had 16 and, of course, the [[IBM System/360]] had 16 general registers. The 1107, PDP-6, S/360 and their successors were popular in the 1960s and 1970s, and that era was dominated by machines with multiple accumulators. So where is the cutoff for "early"? --[[User:Chatul|Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul]] ([[User talk:Chatul|talk]]) 22:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
:The [[IBM 702]] apparently had two accumulators, A and B, according to page 17 of [http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/702/22-6173-1_702prelim_Feb56.pdf the preliminary 702 reference manual], althoug the 705 had 1. And the [[IBM 1401]] has, err, umm, zero? I haven't looked at other vendors' decimal machines. [[User:Guy Harris|Guy Harris]] ([[User talk:Guy Harris|talk]]) 23:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
::{{ping|Guy Harris}}The 705 actually had 16 accumulators, although IBM referred to the smaller ones as Auxiliary Storage Units (ASUs). Of the IBM machines prior to the S/360, only the 702, 705, 7070 and 7080 had multiple accumulators, although there were machines with both an accumulator and a Multiplier-Quotient register, or equivalent.
::It was common for character-oriented machines to be storage-to-storage with no accumulator, as in the 1401/1440/1460/1410/7010 and the RCA 301/3301.
::Other vendors' decimal machines followed the same pattern; either word with single accumulator or character with no accumulator. --[[User:Chatul|Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul]] ([[User talk:Chatul|talk]]) 18:32, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

{{notelist-talk}}

{{reflist-talk}}

Latest revision as of 11:00, 22 January 2024

Massive rework needed

[edit]

This is bad, really bad.

First of all this article suggests an accumulator processors has one accumulator (which 6502 did). However numerous examples are contrary to this such as

  • 6809 has accumulators A and B that could be concatenated to D, 6308 had even more
  • 56300 has again 2 large accumulators of extended width
  • 96000 also has 2 accumulators that are even wider

With 2 accumulators you need only a single bit in the instruction to indicate what accumulator is to be used. 68000 has a lot of data registers, and those are not called accumulators, so the article should state clearly where the limit is. Seems the limit is around 4 (ARM Piccolo)

SWEET16 has one accumulator and 15 other registers, a wealth closer to 68000.

Next is the link to accumulator-based architecture which goes to PDP-8, specifically the section Legacy_of_accumulator-based_architectures which no longer exists. Is there any reason why this has to be split up?

Also it seems a bit lacking that the multiply-and-accumulate is not mentioned.

All in all an article in need of an overhaul. --22:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Amended --21:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully such an overhaul will also disambiguate further, since the term "accumulator" in programming applies to a variable in which values are accumulated... 63.249.90.205 (talk) 00:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Accumulator (computing). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is "early"

[edit]

#Accumulator machines says Almost all early computers were accumulator machines with only the high-performance "supercomputers" having multiple registers. However, the IBM 7070[1] had three accumulators, the UNIVAC 1107[2][a] had 16, the DEC PDP-6[3][b] had 16 and, of course, the IBM System/360 had 16 general registers. The 1107, PDP-6, S/360 and their successors were popular in the 1960s and 1970s, and that era was dominated by machines with multiple accumulators. So where is the cutoff for "early"? --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 22:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The IBM 702 apparently had two accumulators, A and B, according to page 17 of the preliminary 702 reference manual, althoug the 705 had 1. And the IBM 1401 has, err, umm, zero? I haven't looked at other vendors' decimal machines. Guy Harris (talk) 23:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Guy Harris:The 705 actually had 16 accumulators, although IBM referred to the smaller ones as Auxiliary Storage Units (ASUs). Of the IBM machines prior to the S/360, only the 702, 705, 7070 and 7080 had multiple accumulators, although there were machines with both an accumulator and a Multiplier-Quotient register, or equivalent.
It was common for character-oriented machines to be storage-to-storage with no accumulator, as in the 1401/1440/1460/1410/7010 and the RCA 301/3301.
Other vendors' decimal machines followed the same pattern; either word with single accumulator or character with no accumulator. --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 18:32, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

  1. ^ Sperry Rand called them arithmetic registers or A-registers.
  2. ^ Storage locations 0-15 served as both accumulators and index registers.

References

  1. ^ Reference Manual IBM 7070 Data Processing System (PDF) (Second ed.). IBM. January 1960. A22-7003-01.
  2. ^ Technical Bulletin Bulletin UNIVAC 1107 Central Computer (PDF). Remington Rand Univac division of Sperry Rand. November 1961. UT-2463.
  3. ^ Programmed Data Processor-6 Handbook (PDF). DEC. August 1964. F65.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Accumulator_(computing)&oldid=1197909211"