"Portable code" is almost an oxymoron.
Moving applications from a 32 bit environment to a 64 bit environment
can be relatively straightforward or it can be very complex. Even
with a perfectly compatible compiler and linker, and "portable code",
translating an application from 32 to 64 bit can demonstrate
reductions in performance and a great deal of growth in size counter
to the goals of moving to the larger processor word, and then there
are the issues of compatibility with data structures in existing
files that users have created.
It's a non trivial job.
Godfrey
On Jun 18, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Mishka wrote:
32->64 porting is not a big deal, if you have portable code
On 6/18/05, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
it's just a question of critical mass. Every time things have
changed (8 to
16-bit to 32-bit, 86 to 286 to 38s, Dos to Windows, etc.) the same
stories
have been churned out and the same prophets have predicted doom.
--
Cheers,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Thibouille [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 June 2005 10:53
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: For those considering WindowsXP 64bit
No. But still interesting to notice that a major company does
not want to get involved with developing drivers for that OS.
2005/6/18, Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
to install The Only True OS (that is, linux)?
but, in the end, canon claims that it's a lousy software company.
is that a news?
mishka
On 6/17/05, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thibouille"
Subject: For those considering WindowsXP 64bit
Just read this:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24004
We'd better wait...
It's pretty much a rehash of what Microsoft themselves is saying,
other than the self serving pap from Canon.
I do wonder why I bothered to buy a 64 bit processor, if the
software writers are going to refuse to support it.
William Robb
--
----------------------
Thibouille
----------------------
*ist-D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX and KR-10x ...
