From my 1980s 8-bit CPU perspective, the instruction is unhinged based solely on the number of letters. Compared to LDA, STA, RTS, that's not an assembler mnemonic, it's a novel. :-)
Incidentally, how is it a GF(2^8) affine transform? As best as I can tell, it’s a GF(2)^8 affine transform, i.e. an affine transform of vectors of bits with normal XOR addition and AND multiplication, and the polynomial defining GF(2^8) just does not enter anywhere. It does enter into GF2P8AFFINEINVQB, but I’m having difficulties finding a geometric description for that one at all.
I believe that the polynomial for GF2P8AFFINEQB is user-defined. One argument is an 8x8 matrix in GF(2) and the result is [A.x + b] in GF(2)^8 for each 8-bit section. Don't quote me on this, but I believe that matrix multiply in GF(2)^8 gets you a transform in GF(2^8).
Comments
From my 1980s 8-bit CPU perspective, the instruction is unhinged based solely on the number of letters. Compared to LDA, STA, RTS, that's not an assembler mnemonic, it's a novel. :-)
"Load accumulator" (LDA)
vs
"Galois Field 2^8 affine transform on quad binary words" (GF2P8AFFINEQB)
The compression factor isn't quite the same on character count, but it's still abbreviated. :)
Incidentally, how is it a GF(2^8) affine transform? As best as I can tell, it’s a GF(2)^8 affine transform, i.e. an affine transform of vectors of bits with normal XOR addition and AND multiplication, and the polynomial defining GF(2^8) just does not enter anywhere. It does enter into GF2P8AFFINEINVQB, but I’m having difficulties finding a geometric description for that one at all.
I believe that the polynomial for GF2P8AFFINEQB is user-defined. One argument is an 8x8 matrix in GF(2) and the result is [A.x + b] in GF(2)^8 for each 8-bit section. Don't quote me on this, but I believe that matrix multiply in GF(2)^8 gets you a transform in GF(2^8).