I had just assumed that since (at least in originally) RAM
and ROM were on different cards (ROM was on the motherboard
and the RAM was plugged in to a slot), there would be a different
card number...
So the "card number" is just the high 4 bits? Hmm... Not
nearly so useful ... although you -could- put the ROM and
FLASH and RAM into different address spaces, there would
be a lot of wasted space that way...
--
-Richard M. Hartman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Schram [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 4:17 PM
> To: Richard Hartman; Palm Developer Forum
> Subject: Re: Checking if database is in FLASH
>
>
> At 12:49 PM -0700 2000/08/10, Richard Hartman wrote:
> >I'm really surprised that the card # is not used. I mean,
> >it would seem to make sense to me that RAM and ROM
> >and FLASH are all represented as different cards ... but
> >afaik all dbs claim to reside on card 0.
>
> Why assume that? A card number represents an address space,
> not a type of memory. It's the most significant 4 bits of a
> 32 bit pointer.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jim Schram
> Palm Incorporated
> Partner Engineering
>
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
