Article View: comp.arch
Article #12587Re: 64-bit chips, 32-bit compatibility?
From: Lawrence Kirby
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 13:40
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 13:40
25 lines
1501 bytes
1501 bytes
In article <44ers2$sea@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> jfc@mit.edu "John Carr" writes: >There is an implicit assumption in the discussion so far that the integer >register word size is the virtual address size. I don't think so but you're right to point out the distinction. >If we're trying to look >20 years ahead I don't think this is a necessary assumption. It's a false assumption right now. >I don't >think it is necessary now, but the popularity of low level languages and >a lingering overreaction to Intel's 8086 series limit acceptance >of other addressing models. 8086 is one of the classic cases where pointers and ints can be different (i.e. 16 bit register/ints vs. segment+offset for 'far' pointers). -- ----------------------------------------- Lawrence Kirby | fred@genesis.demon.co.uk Wilts, England | 70734.126@compuserve.com -----------------------------------------
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<812382019snz@genesis.demon.co.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!mail2news.demon.co.uk!genesis.demon.co.ukReferences:
<43srit$94b@hermes.synopsys.com> <jgkDFG9HJ.49x@netcom.com> <44boso$ies@dg-rtp.dg.com> <44d1n3$6tn@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <44ers2$sea@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!mail2news.demon.co.uk!genesis.demon.co.uk From: Lawrence Kirby <fred@genesis.demon.co.uk> Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: 64-bit chips, 32-bit compatibility? Date: Fri, 29 Sep 95 13:40:19 GMT Organization: none Message-ID: <812382019snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> References: <43srit$94b@hermes.synopsys.com> <jgkDFG9HJ.49x@netcom.com> <44boso$ies@dg-rtp.dg.com> <44d1n3$6tn@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <44ers2$sea@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> Reply-To: fred@genesis.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: genesis.demon.co.uk X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27