"Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>> Do you really think module authors do have a choice given that last >> sentence ? > > I really do. Most developers will not be confronted with 64-bit systems > for several years to come. That current hardware supports a 64-bit mode > is only one aspect: Most operating system installations on such hardware > will continue to operate in 32-bit mode for quite some time. I think it's worth pointing out that the above is not true in a fairly significant market: AMD hardware under Linux. Just about any AMD chip you can buy for a desktop these days is 64-bit, and all major linux distributions have out-of-the box native x86-64 support (via a native build downloadable as a separate install CD, typically). So while it may well be true that most Win32 users who have 64 bit hardware will still be using it in 32 bit mode, in the Linux world it is /extremely/ common to find native 64 bit users. If you want confirmation, stop by the scipy list anytime for any of the recurrent battles being fought on the 64 bit front (often related to obscure compilation problems with Fortran code). So I think M.A. is right on the money here with his statement. Unless you consider the Linux/64bit camp insignificant. But if that is the case, it might be worth putting a big statement in the 2.5 release notes indicating "there is a good chance, if you use third party extensions and a 64 bit OS, that this won't work for you". Which will mean that a fraction of the scientific userbase (a big, enthusiastic and growing community of python users) will have to stick to 2.4. Regards, f _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
