On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 05:08:06PM +0200, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > Well, here's one - while we all know that C code which assumes a > > pointer and int are the same size is buggy, it makes everything > > substantially simpler if long and void* are the same size. That's true > > for both normal LP64 and ILP32 models. Since n32 was mostly a > > transitional tool (SGI was primarily interested in n64 as I understand > > it), I imagine they wanted path of least damage... > > I see. But do we need the SGI's traditional n32 in Linux then? Having > most experiences in the server world I'd vote for a pure 64-bit setup > (with an optional ability to execute o32 stuff), but I understand there > are people who consider it a waste of resources. > > Therefore, I believe we may choose another way and use an IP32 (if I > encode it right) data model, where we have 32-bit ints and pointers for > these who are short on memory, 64-bit longs for the maximum native > precision (you don't choose long for the type for your favourite "i" loop > counter unless you really need it) and an ability to have double-precision > 128-bit long longs in the distant future (if needed). > > Any opinions? My opinion is that N32 is good enough for people who are short on space. We have too many MIPS ABIs already! -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
