On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 21:47, Benjamin Goldberg wrote: > And for the former... well, we'd be wasting half of the memory that's in > our "32-bit" registers (since we'd still use 64 bits of storage for each > of our registers, even though we're "using" only 32 bits of it), but > there's no speed penalty, and unless there's overflow of the 32 LSB, > there's little harm in using a 64 bit integer as if it were a 32 bit > integer. > > The big waste, of course, is that if code doesn't *use* them, then it > could be wasteful/costly to save them.
And it's this sort of rumination that made me think that this is all just false economics. -- Bryan C. Warnock bwarnock@(gtemail.net|raba.com)
