On 18-Oct-08, at 3:29 PM, matthew green wrote:
in any case, read this to see why we have what we have now: http://www.unix.org/version2/whatsnew/lp64_wp.html
I think most of those arguments given in that paper are almost as completely bogus, and are clearly ignorant of the various elephants in their room, as the (sadly similar) arguments which created the massive and unnecessary bogosity which came out of the Large File Summit.
I think in reality ILP64, or perhaps S32ILP64, has clearly been shown to work just as well for at least some relevant hardware architectures.
A better argument as to why NetBSD uses I32LP64 on those architectures where ILP64 might make more sense would be to say that it was simply easier to follow the herd than to try to ride against them all no matter how bogus were the arguments used by the herd to choose their direction.
It is also good to remember that the "open" in "The Open Group(tm)" means something entirely different than the "open" in "open source" does.
--
Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc.
<woods%planix.ca@localhost>
Attachment:
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part