| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 23 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 54:55:59 |
| Calls: | 583 |
| Files: | 1,139 |
| D/L today: |
179 files (27,921K bytes) |
| Messages: | 111,802 |
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
scientific computing the way some folks here do, I have not gotten the >>impression that a lot of customers were commonly running up against the
4 GB limit in the early '90s;
Even simple data movement (e.g. optimized memcpy) will require half
the instructions on a 64-bit architecture.
According to Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net>:
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
scientific computing the way some folks here do, I have not gotten
the impression that a lot of customers were commonly running up
against the 4 GB limit in the early '90s;
Mainframes certainly had more than 4GB. In 1990 the ES/9000 had more
than 4GB of "expanded" memory and by 1994 there was 8GB of main
memory, using a variety of mapping and segmentation kludges to
address from a 32 bit architecture.
Even simple data movement (e.g. optimized memcpy) will require half
the instructions on a 64-bit architecture.
Er, maybe. There were plenty of 32 bit systems with 64 bit memory.
I would expect that systems with string move instructions would
take advantage of the underlying hardware.
According to Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net>:
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
scientific computing the way some folks here do, I have not gotten the >>>impression that a lot of customers were commonly running up against the
4 GB limit in the early '90s;
Mainframes certainly had more than 4GB. In 1990 the ES/9000 had more
than 4GB of "expanded" memory and by 1994 there was 8GB of main memory,
using a variety of mapping and segmentation kludges to address from a
32 bit architecture.
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> schrieb:
According to Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net>:
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
scientific computing the way some folks here do, I have not gotten the >>>>impression that a lot of customers were commonly running up against the >>>>4 GB limit in the early '90s;
Mainframes certainly had more than 4GB. In 1990 the ES/9000 had more
than 4GB of "expanded" memory and by 1994 there was 8GB of main memory,
using a variety of mapping and segmentation kludges to address from a
32 bit architecture.
#ifdef PEDANTIC
Actually, 31 bits.
#endif
Didn't majority 32-bit RISC machines with general-purpose ambitions have 64-bit FP registers?
It's a 32 bit architecture with 31 bit addressing, kludgily extended
from 24 bit addressing in the 1970s.
That said, Unix generally defined -1 as the return value for all
other system calls, and code that checked for "< 0" instead of
-1 when calling a standard library function or system call was fundamentally >broken.
I would have liked to install 64-bit Debian (IIRC I initially ran
32-bit Debian on the Athlon 64), but they were not ready at the time,
and still busily working on their multi-arch (IIRC) plans, so
eventually I decided to go with Fedora Core 1, which just implemented
/lib and /lib64 and was there first.
For some reason I switched to Gentoo relatively soon after
(/etc/hostname from 2005-02-20, and IIRC Debian still had not finished >hammering out multi-arch at that time), before finally settling in >Debian-land several years later.