Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.spitfire.i.gajendra.net!not-for-mail
From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,openwatcom.users.c_cpp,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: 16:32 far pointers in OpenWatcom C/C++
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 15:50:53 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID: <10el4gt$2cb$1@reader2.panix.com>
References: <hhq63802k7f@news7.newsguy.com> <20251103162451.184@kylheku.com> <dRoOQ.1421028$xYr1.1123604@fx14.iad> <10eda8d$3pd45$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 15:50:53 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader2.panix.com; posting-host="spitfire.i.gajendra.net:166.84.136.80"; logging-data="2443"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Xref: csiph.com alt.folklore.computers:232069 openwatcom.users.c_cpp:3671 comp.lang.c:395119

In article <10eda8d$3pd45$1@dont-email.me>,
Peter Flass  <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> wrote:
>On 11/4/25 08:20, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> writes:
>>> On 2025-11-03, Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11/3/25 13:24, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>
>>> When I saw this subject line, I thought it was some necroposting to
>>> threads from 1990.
>>>
>>> Someone still cared about segmented x86 shit in 2010 (even if 32 bit)?
>> 
>> There are still people on the internet who swear that the 286 is
>> better than sliced bread and refuse to recognize that modern
>> architectures are superior.
>> 
>
>I was thinking, are there any segmented architectures today? Most 
>disguise segmentation as a flat address space (e.g. IBM System/370 et.seq.)

x86_64 is still nominally segmented; what "code segment" the
processor is running in matters, even in long mode.  But most of
the segment data is ignored by hardware (e.g., base and limits)
in 64-bit mode.

Of course, it retains a notion of segmentation for a) 16- and
32-bit code compatibility, and b) startup, where the processor
(still!!) comes out of reset in 16-bit real mode.

Intel had a proposal to do away with 16-bit mode and anything
other than long mode for 64-bit, but it seems to have died.  So
it seems like we'll be stuck with x86 segmentation --- at least
for compatibility purposes --- for a while longer still.

	- Dan C.