Article View: comp.sys.intel
Article #1520Re: segments and Unix
From: Mike Wexler
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1986 01:10
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1986 01:10
20 lines
1555 bytes
1555 bytes
Reply-To: mike@peregrine.UUCP (Mike Wexler) Organization: Peregrine Systems, Inc., Irvine, CA In article <260@mipos3.UUCP> kds@mipos3.UUCP (Ken Shoemaker ~) writes: ->I'm sorry, but I have to take exception to some of the points raised here: ->In article <9400@sun.uucp> david@sun.uUCp (David DiGiacomo) writes: ->>No, for four reasons: ->> - It is very expensive to expand pointers to hold a reasonably large ->> (16 bit?) segment number field. ->very expensive? They are already at least 32-bits wide! Besides, I ->thought that the whole idea of the 32-bit processors was that you got ->to talk to lots of memory... The point is to handle segments you would want to have 48 bit points: a 16 bit segment number and a 32 bit offset within the segment. Otherwise, you would be limiting how big individual objects could be. The other problem is you might want to have >65536 objects. -- Mike Wexler (trwrb|scgvaxd)!felix!peregrine!mike (714)855-3923
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1219@peregrine.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!felix!peregrine!mikeReferences:
<13802@amdcad.UUCP> <9400@sun.uucp> <260@mipos3.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!felix!peregrine!mike From: mike@peregrine.UUCP (Mike Wexler) Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: segments and Unix Message-ID: <1219@peregrine.UUCP> Date: Mon, 24-Nov-86 20:10:11 EST Article-I.D.: peregrin.1219 Posted: Mon Nov 24 20:10:11 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Nov-86 20:33:37 EST References: <13802@amdcad.UUCP> <9400@sun.uucp> <260@mipos3.UUCP> Organization: Peregrine Systems, Inc., Irvine, CA Lines: 20