On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 05:53:22PM -0400, Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc. wrote:
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.
I don't understand the point of your argument. What *purpose* is
served by making "int" 64 bits wide? What problem are you trying to
solve?