Fwd: Platform x64 argument

[Greg Keogh]

>
> Do you actually support/ship your app to run on x86-only or ARM
> environments? If not, it probably doesn’t matter and I would probably give
> this one and save the battles for other things.
>

All machines involved everywhere are x64. I will not concede defeat in this
battle!! -- *Greg*

Re: Platform x64 argument

[David Connors]

How's x64 emulation going on Windows on ARM these days? Last time I looked
it was garbage.


David Connors
da...@connors.com | M +61 417 189 363
Telegram: https://t.me/davidconnors
LinkedIn: http://au.linkedin.com/in/davidjohnconnors



On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 at 14:30, Dr Greg Low via ozdotnet <
ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com> wrote:

> Yes, I was wondering the same thing David. I can’t recall the last time I
> worked on a 32 bit machine.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> Dr Greg Low
>
>
>
> 1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile
>
> SQL Down Under | Web: https://sqldownunder.com | About Greg:
> https://about.me/greg.low
>
>
>
> *From:* David Kean via ozdotnet 
> *Sent:* Thursday, 13 October 2022 3:13 PM
> *To:* ozDotNet 
> *Cc:* Greg Keogh ; David Kean  >
> *Subject:* RE: Platform x64 argument
>
>
>
> Do you actually support/ship your app to run on x86-only or ARM
> environments? If not, it probably doesn’t matter and I would probably give
> this one and save the battles for other things.
>
>
>
> *From:* Greg Keogh via ozdotnet 
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 13, 2022 9:46 AM
> *To:* ozDotNet 
> *Cc:* Greg Keogh 
> *Subject:* Platform x64 argument
>
>
>
> Folks, one of my colleagues insists on compiling everything as platform
> x64 mainly because he thinks "it's an x64 world and it creates a better
> impression". For a year I've tried to convince him that for managed code
> that it's a complete waste of time. I've told him that ildasm.exe shows
> that for x64 and AnyCPU the generated IL and the manifests are identical, I
> even told him that dumpbin.exe shows the only non trivial difference in the
> PE headers is a couple of flags that show x86/x64 and PE32/PE32+, but they
> don't affect the loading and running of a PE containing IL and metadata.
>
>
>
> Does anyone have paradigm-shattering evidence I can give my colleague to
> break his habit? (I'm hoping I'm right of course!!)
>
>
>
> *Greg*
> --
> ozdotnet mailing list
> To manage your subscription, access archives: https://codify.mailman3.com/
>

RE: Platform x64 argument

[Dr Greg Low]

Yes, I was wondering the same thing David. I can’t recall the last time I 
worked on a 32 bit machine.

Regards,

Greg

Dr Greg Low

1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile
SQL Down Under | Web: https://sqldownunder.com | 
About Greg:  https://about.me/greg.low

From: David Kean via ozdotnet 
Sent: Thursday, 13 October 2022 3:13 PM
To: ozDotNet 
Cc: Greg Keogh ; David Kean 
Subject: RE: Platform x64 argument

Do you actually support/ship your app to run on x86-only or ARM environments? 
If not, it probably doesn’t matter and I would probably give this one and save 
the battles for other things.

From: Greg Keogh via ozdotnet 
mailto:ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com>>
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2022 9:46 AM
To: ozDotNet mailto:ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com>>
Cc: Greg Keogh mailto:gfke...@gmail.com>>
Subject: Platform x64 argument

Folks, one of my colleagues insists on compiling everything as platform x64 
mainly because he thinks "it's an x64 world and it creates a better 
impression". For a year I've tried to convince him that for managed code that 
it's a complete waste of time. I've told him that ildasm.exe shows that for x64 
and AnyCPU the generated IL and the manifests are identical, I even told him 
that dumpbin.exe shows the only non trivial difference in the PE headers is a 
couple of flags that show x86/x64 and PE32/PE32+, but they don't affect the 
loading and running of a PE containing IL and metadata.

Does anyone have paradigm-shattering evidence I can give my colleague to break 
his habit? (I'm hoping I'm right of course!!)

Greg

RE: Platform x64 argument

[David Kean]

Do you actually support/ship your app to run on x86-only or ARM environments? 
If not, it probably doesn’t matter and I would probably give this one and save 
the battles for other things.

From: Greg Keogh via ozdotnet 
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2022 9:46 AM
To: ozDotNet 
Cc: Greg Keogh 
Subject: Platform x64 argument

Folks, one of my colleagues insists on compiling everything as platform x64 
mainly because he thinks "it's an x64 world and it creates a better 
impression". For a year I've tried to convince him that for managed code that 
it's a complete waste of time. I've told him that ildasm.exe shows that for x64 
and AnyCPU the generated IL and the manifests are identical, I even told him 
that dumpbin.exe shows the only non trivial difference in the PE headers is a 
couple of flags that show x86/x64 and PE32/PE32+, but they don't affect the 
loading and running of a PE containing IL and metadata.

Does anyone have paradigm-shattering evidence I can give my colleague to break 
his habit? (I'm hoping I'm right of course!!)

Greg

Re: Platform x64 argument

[mike smith]

Sneak some x86 test cases into the build and have it break.

On Thu, 13 Oct 2022, 11:07 Tony McGee via ozdotnet, 
wrote:

> My understanding is that you target what you want to support, so if he's
> only shipping fully managed code and supporting x64 systems then it doesn't
> matter too much but in that case may be sidelining x86 or ARM users for no
> real reason.
> It gets more complicated if you need to support multiple architectures or
> have unmanaged dependencies where you need to match the bitness of the
> dependencies with the application process, this is where AnyCPU and AnyCPU
> (32-bit preferred) options will start to shine.
>
> https://dzone.com/articles/what-anycpu-really-means-net
>
> -Tony
>
> On 13/10/2022 08:45, Greg Keogh via ozdotnet wrote:
>
> Folks, one of my colleagues insists on compiling everything as platform
> x64 mainly because he thinks "it's an x64 world and it creates a better
> impression". For a year I've tried to convince him that for managed code
> that it's a complete waste of time. I've told him that ildasm.exe shows
> that for x64 and AnyCPU the generated IL and the manifests are identical, I
> even told him that dumpbin.exe shows the only non trivial difference in the
> PE headers is a couple of flags that show x86/x64 and PE32/PE32+, but they
> don't affect the loading and running of a PE containing IL and metadata.
>
> Does anyone have paradigm-shattering evidence I can give my colleague to
> break his habit? (I'm hoping I'm right of course!!)
>
> *Greg*
>
>
> --
> ozdotnet mailing list
> To manage your subscription, access archives: https://codify.mailman3.com/

Re: Platform x64 argument

[Tony McGee]

My understanding is that you target what you want to support, so if he's 
only shipping fully managed code and supporting x64 systems then it 
doesn't matter too much but in that case may be sidelining x86 or ARM 
users for no real reason.
It gets more complicated if you need to support multiple architectures 
or have unmanaged dependencies where you need to match the bitness of 
the dependencies with the application process, this is where AnyCPU and 
AnyCPU (32-bit preferred) options will start to shine.


https://dzone.com/articles/what-anycpu-really-means-net

-Tony

On 13/10/2022 08:45, Greg Keogh via ozdotnet wrote:
Folks, one of my colleagues insists on compiling everything as 
platform x64 mainly because he thinks "it's an x64 world and it 
creates a better impression". For a year I've tried to convince him 
that for managed code that it's a complete waste of time. I've told 
him that ildasm.exe shows that for x64 and AnyCPU the generated IL and 
the manifests are identical, I even told him that dumpbin.exe shows 
the only non trivial difference in the PE headers is a couple of flags 
that show x86/x64 and PE32/PE32+, but they don't affect the loading 
and running of a PE containing IL and metadata.


Does anyone have paradigm-shattering evidence I can give my colleague 
to break his habit? (I'm hoping I'm right of course!!)


/Greg/

Re: Platform x64 argument

[Preet Sangha]

> "it's an x64 world and it creates a better impression"

*the 2000's called and they want their outdated assumptions back*

regards,
Preet, in Auckland NZ



On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 at 11:48, Greg Keogh via ozdotnet 
wrote:

> Folks, one of my colleagues insists on compiling everything as platform
> x64 mainly because he thinks "it's an x64 world and it creates a better
> impression". For a year I've tried to convince him that for managed code
> that it's a complete waste of time. I've told him that ildasm.exe shows
> that for x64 and AnyCPU the generated IL and the manifests are identical, I
> even told him that dumpbin.exe shows the only non trivial difference in the
> PE headers is a couple of flags that show x86/x64 and PE32/PE32+, but they
> don't affect the loading and running of a PE containing IL and metadata.
>
> Does anyone have paradigm-shattering evidence I can give my colleague to
> break his habit? (I'm hoping I'm right of course!!)
>
> *Greg*
> --
> ozdotnet mailing list
> To manage your subscription, access archives: https://codify.mailman3.com/

Platform x64 argument

[Greg Keogh]

Folks, one of my colleagues insists on compiling everything as platform x64
mainly because he thinks "it's an x64 world and it creates a better
impression". For a year I've tried to convince him that for managed code
that it's a complete waste of time. I've told him that ildasm.exe shows
that for x64 and AnyCPU the generated IL and the manifests are identical, I
even told him that dumpbin.exe shows the only non trivial difference in the
PE headers is a couple of flags that show x86/x64 and PE32/PE32+, but they
don't affect the loading and running of a PE containing IL and metadata.

Does anyone have paradigm-shattering evidence I can give my colleague to
break his habit? (I'm hoping I'm right of course!!)

*Greg*