Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA02452
	for pups-liszt; Wed, 15 Apr 1998 13:09:43 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA02444
	for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Wed, 15 Apr 1998 13:09:37 +1000 (EST)
Received: from goppelt.op.net (d-phlarc1-00.ppp.op.net [209.152.199.64]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.16 $) with SMTP id XAA00267 for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 23:09:25 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199804150309.XAA00267@renoir.op.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <edgee@cyberpass.net>
From: "Ed G." <edgee@cyberpass.net>
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 23:09:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: PDP-11 Addressing Modes
Reply-to: edgee@cyberpass.net
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.54)
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

The first line of chapter on addressing modes in the *processor
handbook* states:

"In the PDP-11 family, all operand addressing is accomplished through
the eight general purpose registers."

If I understand correctly, even things like immediate operands and
addresses are represented as an addressing mode of a register, namely
the PC.  I think this is quite cool.

What do people here on the list think of the flexibility and 
generality of the PDP-11's addressing modes?  Is this a well thought
out architecture in your view?  How are the PDP-11's addressing modes
better or worse than those of other processors, past and present?

