On Tue, January 6, 2009 08:45, Fred A. Miller wrote:
Mads Martin Joergensen wrote:
* James Knott <james.knott(a)rogers.com> [Jan
05. 2009 19:22]:
software may work perfectly on x32 while barfing on x64,
software that wasn't designed with x64 in mind. Making software
with every conceivable architecture upgrade of the distant future
add massive layers of abstraction.
Many years ago, while taking a C programming
course, I ran into some
"gotchas" with variable sizes, when moving between 32 & 16 bit
systems. In class, we were using Borland's Turbo C++ for DOS and at
home I had Borland C++ for OS/2. There was a difference in the size
of some variable types, such as INT, so that a program that ran fine
at home would fail in class, because I had exceeded the maximum
integer size. However, I have no idea how 32 & 64 bit systems compare
with this issue.
It's still the exact same thing. People are not making architecture
independent code, still.
Supposedly, MickySoft is getting with the program and doing so. I have
NO data to prove it, only from what I heard from the "inside." Anyway,
IMHO, it's ignorant not to be writing 64-bit independent code. Make the
effort now and increase performance. From now forward, there won't be
anymore new 32-bit processors from Intel. It's a 64-bit world and has
been for awhile.
It's not a mortal sin to write architecture dependent code, but only if
you know what you are doing. For example, if you are coding in the
embedded world on a 5MHz 8088 CPU with 32KiB RAM (I kid you not), it is
ignorant to be writing hardware indepentent code. You won't be coding in
Java, you will be coding in Assembler or C.
In most other situations, please code architecture independent.
I only want to make an argument against the usage of absolute words like
"ALWAYS" and "NEVER". The world isn't black&white, it's
shades of RGB.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help(a)opensuse.org