[email protected] said: > The 32-bit x86 architecture is so register-crippled that C code typically > runs about 15% faster when compiled for X86_64 than when compiled for i386, > in spite of the poorer cache locality caused by the larger pointers.
I don't want the code to run in 32 bit mode. I just want to constrain pointers to have 0s in the top 32 bits so they can be stored in 32 bits of memory. I think that works if loads/stores treat them as unsigned. I don't think there is anything fundamental that constrains pointers to be the same size as longs. I'm not a language wizard. Some software rule may require it, but the hardware doesn't. [email protected] said: > It is, however, useful to make 32-on-64-bit builds work for testing 32-bit > issues. This is often more complicated than just adding "-m32" to the > flags. I can do that on ARM or an Intel system build for i386. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
