>>30That's C being perverted to support x86, not a sign that x86 was designed for C. Probably the only real "C machine" was the PDP-11 and maybe the VAX-11 as those were where C evolved, all later development was focused on keeping the C language simple and generic enough that it wouldn't depend on any processor features (which also meant those features, if present couldn't be taken advantage of without an aggressive optimizer or using assembly subroutines). x86 on the other hand was originally developed for assembly programmers with the complicated features included to facilitate multi-tasking (which goes against the C assumption of no MMU).