On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 01:51:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
The lack of x87 wouldn't be a problem. At least, i386 still has the
code left from the old days and will emulate it transparently; when
such an amd64 CPU pops out the x87 emulation can be ported.
In fact, it has a separate
Lennart Sorensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 11:40:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 02:24:35PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote:
(amd64 is only faster in 64-bit mode because of all the poorly
designed x86 32-bit instruction set.)
x86 32-bit
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 12:32:18PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Exactly. Isn't the x86_64 instruction set basicaly the same as ia32
just with a few extra opcodes and more registers? Any general fault in
the instruction set should still remain.
x86 processors have multiple modes with
Lennart Sorensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 12:32:18PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Exactly. Isn't the x86_64 instruction set basicaly the same as ia32
just with a few extra opcodes and more registers? Any general fault in
the instruction set should still remain.
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 09:17:08AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
So goodbye to mmx, and various other crap thigns. x87 is supported on
current CPUs but there are feature flags that will permit the removal of
x87 support in the future. Both linux and windows encourage the use of
sse instead
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 11:40:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 02:24:35PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote:
(amd64 is only faster in 64-bit mode because of all the poorly
designed x86 32-bit instruction set.)
x86 32-bit instruction set and designed in one sentence? Hah.
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 02:24:35PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote:
(amd64 is only faster in 64-bit mode because of all the poorly
designed x86 32-bit instruction set.)
x86 32-bit instruction set and designed in one sentence? Hah.
--
Fun will now commence
-- Seven Of Nine, Ashes to Ashes,
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
For those keeping score at home, notice that doing the much larger
task of upgrading GCC's version is apparently easier than python's.
Of course, if you read a little further in the message to -announce,
you'll see the part about oh, and maybe we broke 1600
* Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-06-07 00:07]:
For those keeping score at home, notice that doing the much larger
task of upgrading GCC's version is apparently easier than python's.
Of course, if you read a little further in the message to -announce,
you'll see the part about oh,
This one time, at band camp, Anthony DeRobertis said:
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
For those keeping score at home, notice that doing the much larger
task of upgrading GCC's version is apparently easier than python's.
Of course, if you read a little further in the message to
* Thomas Bushnell BSG [Tue, 06 Jun 2006 19:39:57 -0700]:
For those keeping score at home, notice that doing the much larger
task of upgrading GCC's version is apparently easier than python's.
And shutting the^W^Wbitting one's tongue apparently more difficult than not!
--
Adeodato Simó
Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And it's also worth noting that the people interested in the transition
filed bugs with patches for all but a few of them, which involved a
massive amount of work. I suppose it's possible people interested in
the python transition could do the same
Adeodato Simó [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Thomas Bushnell BSG [Tue, 06 Jun 2006 19:39:57 -0700]:
For those keeping score at home, notice that doing the much larger
task of upgrading GCC's version is apparently easier than python's.
And shutting the^W^Wbitting one's tongue apparently more
This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said:
Actually, since the very same person sent the GCC 4.1 announcement,
and is the maintainer of python-defaults...
Since the python team have decided to leave the rest of us in the
dark, all I can do is guess that the job of upgrading
Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said:
Actually, since the very same person sent the GCC 4.1 announcement,
and is the maintainer of python-defaults...
Since the python team have decided to leave the rest of us in the
dark, all I can do
Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't remember seeing any posts from you about the progress of the
transition testing. Have you gotten very far with it? How much of the
python using archive have you rebuilt and/or tested? I am sure python
people and the general devel readers would
Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The compilers from GCC 4.1 provide now the default compiler for etch
for Ada, C, C++, Objc, ObjC++, Fortran95 and for the Java language.
The packages are currently in the incoming queue and will hit the
archive on Wed. June 7. Compilers for Fortran77
17 matches
Mail list logo
