On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 12:32 -0600, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> So, I would just echo what you said: we hardly will see the need in
> 128 bit CPUs soon. (BTW, I'm glad to hear the choice which is power
> of 2. As, in general, the length of CPU word can be anything: 17,
> 89, ... I'm not mentioning 1 which is used in calculators, as 1
> _is_ power of 2 ;-)
Never experienced 17 or 89 bit machines. In the past I worked on 8 bit,
16 bit and a very large and expensive 36-bit machine (so expensive was
it that the manufacturer offered bribes - my then boss's boss got caught
and was allowed to resign with an unblemished record.)
Can not image cheap electronic calculators working with 1 bit CPUs.
Time to create a Centos OT mailing list ?
--
Regards,
Paul.
England, EU.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
