LLL strategy

[Mike Prince]

On Wed, 21 Dec 1994, Dr. J. Van Sckalkwyk (external) wrote:

> Dear All
> 
> No one seems to have answered one of my (I think fundamental) 
> questions:

(I'm sorry)

> Should we be looking at C for our implementation, or design our own 
> "Symbolic assembly language" based on our pooled knowledge / 
> evaluation of various microprocessors..

Even though I heard a lot of flak about C earlier in this group, I'm 
programming my kernel in C (if that's your question).  As far as the 
LLL goes it'll be forth like with a lot of twists.  I'm hoping to keep 
the kernel/whatever as small as possible, and write as much in a MLL 
(medium level language, just above LLL).

The reason for the MLL, is early on in the design cycle it gives us 
latitude to change the LLL without having to rewrite all our code.

I'll be stoked when the HLL come along!

Mike