Transport Triggered Architecture

These days it's all about hating on side effects and sipping latte while cloud computing with a dildo in your ass. Why go through such great length to remove side effects anyway? Because it makes it easier to formally prove? Yeah right, that's almost guaranteed to never happen. Instead, we should embrace side effects. Just look at this snippet of assembly that I have here. It's written for a simulator I have in my head. It is a fibs implementation. Just look at how elegant it is. It does everything with a single instruction. Shoehorn a comparison in there somehow and it's a Turing machine (or maybe you don't have to do that either;. I'm not an expert on faggots' theories). I'm in love already.

move $add.a, 0
move $add.b, 1
fibs:
move $add.a, $add.b
move $add.b, $add.a
move $ip, @fibs

Beautiful. I love it. Everything is just moves. Better than a Lisp Machine. So naturally, the industry had to go in a completely tangential direction. Fucking Intel baggage has once again held us back and done decades of damage to elegant computing.

>>5
I'm suprised that you're the one making the case for code generation difficulty. Anyway, compiler design is not my problem.

>>7
Oh thanks, I and everyone else in here would have never thought to look for information on Wikipedia! You are a true information seeker who has performed a valuable service.

>>8
If anything, CISC instruction sets would be syntactic sugar for this. But it doesn't really apply that way except in the most general sense that all CISC instructions are just macros for RISC instructions, and all instructions are just syntactic sugar for a Turing machine and it's tape.