>It has a soup of wacky opcodes to optimize corner cases
OK, go ahead and name one (1) such opcode. I'll wait.
>obscure vendor specific extensions that are absolutely CISC-y (examine T-Head's additions if you don't believe me!).
Yes, these extensions are harmful, and that's why they're obscure and vendor-specific.
RISC-V considers pros and cons, evaluates across use cases, and weights everything when considering whether to accept something into the standard specs.
Simplicity itself is valuable; that is at the core of RISC. So the default is to reject. A strong argument needs to be made to justify adding anything.
>It has a soup of wacky opcodes to optimize corner cases
OK, go ahead and name one (1) such opcode. I'll wait.
>obscure vendor specific extensions that are absolutely CISC-y (examine T-Head's additions if you don't believe me!).
Yes, these extensions are harmful, and that's why they're obscure and vendor-specific.
RISC-V considers pros and cons, evaluates across use cases, and weights everything when considering whether to accept something into the standard specs.
Simplicity itself is valuable; that is at the core of RISC. So the default is to reject. A strong argument needs to be made to justify adding anything.