Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #80902 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-08-29 20:57 +0200 |
| Last post | 2021-09-01 16:32 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 301 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-08-29 20:57 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-08-30 21:59 -0500
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2021-08-30 21:53 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2021-08-30 21:59 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-08-31 09:01 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-08-31 03:00 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 23:46 -0500
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 08:19 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 15:32 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 19:20 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 19:44 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 13:17 -0500
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 20:32 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 19:00 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 15:06 -0500
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 20:14 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 20:37 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-08-31 10:08 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-08-31 14:54 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-08-31 15:00 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 12:49 -0500
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-08-30 21:23 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-08-30 23:29 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 12:27 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-08-31 07:37 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 14:14 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-08-31 07:06 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 17:20 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-08-31 15:36 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 17:44 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-08-31 09:12 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 18:20 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-08-31 16:40 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 19:04 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-08-31 21:37 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 07:25 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 09:26 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 10:14 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 11:07 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-01 10:31 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 20:27 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 15:22 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-09-01 07:52 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 15:21 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2021-09-01 09:41 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-01 18:11 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 18:04 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-01 18:27 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 19:02 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-09-01 21:36 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-02 06:58 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-02 11:34 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 14:51 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-02 23:31 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-03 11:12 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-03 15:35 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-03 16:46 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-03 22:01 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-03 20:45 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-04 01:06 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-04 02:12 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-04 09:12 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-09-04 18:05 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 08:43 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 08:59 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 10:12 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-06 11:27 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-06 12:48 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-04 15:28 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-04 17:44 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-05 11:24 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-04 10:14 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-04 09:36 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-09-04 17:00 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-06 11:03 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-06 09:11 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-06 13:08 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-06 15:26 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-09-07 15:05 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-07 15:07 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-07 19:41 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-08 09:38 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-08 10:29 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-09 10:58 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-09 08:55 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-09 12:15 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-09 09:19 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-09 14:41 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-09 22:19 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-09 16:09 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-09 12:41 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-08 10:24 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-08 20:22 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-09 08:54 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-09 14:47 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-09 16:13 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-09 12:42 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-10 09:37 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-10 13:27 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-10 05:41 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-10 15:31 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-10 16:45 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-10 07:21 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-11 11:20 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-10 14:50 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-10 14:56 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-10 17:38 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-10 15:47 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-11 18:40 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-12 09:23 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-12 12:57 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-12 16:22 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 12:49 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-12 16:13 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 18:45 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-13 10:55 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-13 14:15 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-13 15:32 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-13 12:07 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-13 22:18 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-12 09:48 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-13 10:52 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-12 23:12 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-09-13 22:00 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-14 09:24 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-13 21:42 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-14 10:15 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-14 09:12 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-14 15:01 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-14 17:07 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-09-14 21:42 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-10 16:13 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-10 17:45 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-10 12:23 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-10 17:09 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-10 14:17 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-11 09:06 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-09 12:41 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-09 22:17 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-10 09:39 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-10 13:29 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-12 08:56 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-12 09:18 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-12 09:21 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-12 09:29 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 12:55 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-12 16:14 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-12 23:13 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-13 05:23 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > HorseyWorsey@the_stables.com - 2021-09-13 10:56 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-13 14:55 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-09-12 01:09 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-12 01:29 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 11:46 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-12 04:42 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 13:54 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-12 06:01 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-09-12 15:22 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 18:53 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-12 11:29 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-13 08:38 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-12 17:38 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-09-13 03:52 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-12 19:10 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 11:32 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-09 18:37 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-07 17:56 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > MisterMule@stubborn.uk - 2021-09-08 10:28 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-08 13:31 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-09 11:06 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-09 01:27 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-09 13:05 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-09 10:29 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-09 22:28 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-09 12:40 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-10 09:51 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-10 00:07 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-10 11:26 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-10 10:02 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-10 09:10 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-10 11:32 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-12 09:00 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-12 11:29 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-10 13:47 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-11 11:02 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-11 00:33 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-11 11:42 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-09-15 19:20 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-11 19:15 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-11 20:56 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-12 12:11 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 11:53 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-12 11:17 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-13 12:51 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-13 11:03 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-14 12:05 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-14 10:28 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-15 08:17 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-12 09:10 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-12 21:51 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> - 2021-09-12 15:55 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-09-12 21:18 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-13 08:48 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-13 15:09 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-13 05:28 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-13 09:23 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-12 12:21 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-10 05:29 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-10 12:20 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 11:51 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-03 05:13 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-03 11:30 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-03 11:19 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-03 13:33 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-03 15:44 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-03 17:40 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-03 17:58 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-03 22:23 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-04 12:20 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-06 05:42 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-09-03 08:49 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-03 17:42 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-09-05 04:29 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-05 05:11 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-06 05:45 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-09-06 03:38 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-06 12:00 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-06 16:38 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-09-06 15:52 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-07 04:39 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-09-07 07:23 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-09-07 07:31 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-07 21:47 +1200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-08 10:18 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-08 11:32 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-09-08 05:02 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-08 13:44 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-09-08 07:41 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-08 16:44 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2021-09-08 09:04 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-08 20:16 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-08 17:27 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-08 20:23 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-08 22:38 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-09 08:11 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2021-09-09 09:25 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-09 18:43 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-09-06 05:37 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> - 2021-09-06 11:54 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-10-06 13:01 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 23:41 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-01 23:32 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-02 12:31 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-02 11:11 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2021-09-02 16:04 +0300
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? RantingRover <noemail@4u.com> - 2021-09-02 13:14 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-09-01 21:43 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-01 04:40 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-08-31 15:02 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "see.my....@gmail.com" <see.my.homepage@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 10:26 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-08-31 19:46 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-01 04:42 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 07:26 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-09-01 07:41 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 08:03 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-09-01 08:34 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 08:43 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2021-09-01 08:55 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 10:05 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-09-01 21:34 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 10:10 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 10:37 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 10:44 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 10:48 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 10:51 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 11:15 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 12:15 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-01 06:49 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 15:50 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-01 07:16 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 16:30 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 10:28 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 09:57 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 10:13 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 10:44 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 11:05 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 11:17 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 12:17 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 12:48 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 12:54 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 15:20 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-01 11:11 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 12:19 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-09-01 18:14 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 20:34 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-09-01 21:55 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 16:30 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 05:30 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 19:03 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 21:12 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-01 16:32 -0400
Page 11 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 9 10 [11] 12 13 … 16 Next page →
| From | Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-12 15:55 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <20210912155517.0e0ea2be6223a09a71feffaa@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #81201 |
On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:51:32 +1200 Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote: > On 12/09/2021 21:10, Juha Nieminen wrote: > > > > There's no reason to use optimizations while writing code and testing it. > > There may be many! > > Unoptimised code being too slow or too big to run on the target is > common in real-time or pretend (i.e. Linux) real-time systems. Getting > more comprehensive error checking is another. Checking that code actually tests correctly when fully optimized is also important. The number of programmers who understand basic things like the strict aliasing rule, or when pointer arithmetic is permitted in C++, is in my experience low (it became obvious during consideration of P0593 for C++20 that many of those on the C++ standard committee didn't understand the second of those). In fact I suspect the number of programmers who fully understand all aspects of C++ and who are fully versed in the standard is very small and approaching zero. Correspondingly, I suspect that the number of C++ programs which do not unwittingly rely on undefined behaviour also approaches 0. Choosing -O3 on testing will at least tell you whether your particular compiler version in question, when optimizing code with undefined behaviour that you had not previously recognized as undefined, will give results contradicting your expectations. Programmers who treat C as if it were a high level assembler language are particularly prone to this problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-12 21:18 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <shlnb4$6e1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81217 |
On 12/09/2021 15:55, Chris Vine wrote: > On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:51:32 +1200 > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote: >> On 12/09/2021 21:10, Juha Nieminen wrote: >>> >>> There's no reason to use optimizations while writing code and testing it. >> >> There may be many! >> >> Unoptimised code being too slow or too big to run on the target is >> common in real-time or pretend (i.e. Linux) real-time systems. Getting >> more comprehensive error checking is another. > > Checking that code actually tests correctly when fully optimized is also > important. > > The number of programmers who understand basic things like the strict > aliasing rule, or when pointer arithmetic is permitted in C++, is in my > experience low (it became obvious during consideration of P0593 for > C++20 that many of those on the C++ standard committee didn't understand > the second of those). In fact I suspect the number of programmers who > fully understand all aspects of C++ and who are fully versed in the > standard is very small and approaching zero. Correspondingly, I suspect > that the number of C++ programs which do not unwittingly rely on > undefined behaviour also approaches 0. > > Choosing -O3 on testing will at least tell you whether your particular > compiler version in question, when optimizing code with undefined > behaviour that you had not previously recognized as undefined, will > give results contradicting your expectations. Programmers who treat C > as if it were a high level assembler language are particularly prone to > this problem. > The fun one I've had when debugging is when the compiler correctly spots that a bit of code really ought to be a function because it's duplicated. Which means you end up in the same bit of machine code from two different source locations. This is especially fun when looking at post-mortem dump files of some code somebody else wrote. While I've only ever once or twice found a genuine compiler-made-bad-code bug in my entire career UB resulting in different behaviour from bad source is much more common. And if you want to be sure about that you need to debug with the target optimisation level. Andy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-13 08:48 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <shms8d$1l2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81226 |
On 12/09/2021 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote: > On 12/09/2021 15:55, Chris Vine wrote: >> On Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:51:32 +1200 >> Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> On 12/09/2021 21:10, Juha Nieminen wrote: >>>> >>>> There's no reason to use optimizations while writing code and >>>> testing it. >>> >>> There may be many! >>> >>> Unoptimised code being too slow or too big to run on the target is >>> common in real-time or pretend (i.e. Linux) real-time systems. Getting >>> more comprehensive error checking is another. >> >> Checking that code actually tests correctly when fully optimized is also >> important. >> >> The number of programmers who understand basic things like the strict >> aliasing rule, or when pointer arithmetic is permitted in C++, is in my >> experience low (it became obvious during consideration of P0593 for >> C++20 that many of those on the C++ standard committee didn't understand >> the second of those). In fact I suspect the number of programmers who >> fully understand all aspects of C++ and who are fully versed in the >> standard is very small and approaching zero. Correspondingly, I suspect >> that the number of C++ programs which do not unwittingly rely on >> undefined behaviour also approaches 0. >> >> Choosing -O3 on testing will at least tell you whether your particular >> compiler version in question, when optimizing code with undefined >> behaviour that you had not previously recognized as undefined, will >> give results contradicting your expectations. Programmers who treat C >> as if it were a high level assembler language are particularly prone to >> this problem. >> > > The fun one I've had when debugging is when the compiler correctly spots > that a bit of code really ought to be a function because it's > duplicated. Which means you end up in the same bit of machine code from > two different source locations. The relationship between source code and object code sections is far looser with modern optimising compilers, and C++ rather than C. It does pose challenges for debugging sometimes, but it is worth the cost (IMHO) for being able to write better code with fewer bugs in the first place! > > This is especially fun when looking at post-mortem dump files of some > code somebody else wrote. > Debugging someone else's code is always horrible... > While I've only ever once or twice found a genuine > compiler-made-bad-code bug in my entire career UB resulting in different > behaviour from bad source is much more common. And if you want to be > sure about that you need to debug with the target optimisation level. > I have hit a few bugs in compilers over the years. I've occasionally had to use compilers that had a fair number of bugs, which can be an interesting experience, and I've even found bugs in gcc on occasion. I agree with you that you need to do your debugging and testing at the target optimisation level (with occasional variations during bug-hunting, depending on the kind of bug). And when the compiler bug involves ordering of instructions in connection with interrupt disabling, you need to be examining the assembly code when fully optimising - there are no alternatives (certainly not testing).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-13 15:09 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <lQJ%I.15475$4X4.5891@fx27.iad> |
| In reply to | #81238 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: >On 12/09/2021 22:18, Vir Campestris wrote: ace! > >> >> This is especially fun when looking at post-mortem dump files of some >> code somebody else wrote. >> > >Debugging someone else's code is always horrible... I've been doing that for forty years now; it's more likely than not that any programmer in a large organization or working on a legacy codebase will have to debug someone else's code. Frankly, it's not that difficult - although it can, at times, be a time-consuming slog - there was a time when a custom X.509 certificate management system (running on Solaris) would very occasionally SIGSEGV. This was a large codebase that includes several cryptographic libraries (bsafe, libssl, etc.). I finally tracked it down to a linkage issue - different parts of the application had linked against different versions of libssl and would call a setup function from one and try to use the resulting data structure in another. > >> While I've only ever once or twice found a genuine >> compiler-made-bad-code bug in my entire career UB resulting in different >> behaviour from bad source is much more common. And if you want to be >> sure about that you need to debug with the target optimisation level. >> > >I have hit a few bugs in compilers over the years. My first was back in the Portable C Compiler days - Motorola had ported it to the M88100 processor family and we were running cfront to compile C++ code and compiled the resulting C with the Motorola PCC port (for which we had the source). cfront generates expressions with up to a dozen or more comma operators - when PCC was processing the parse tree for those statements, it would run out of temporary registers and the codegen phase would fail. I implemented a sethi-ullman algorithm that, given a tree, would compute the number of temps required and added code to spill the registers to the stack if needed. More recently, we've run into several GCC bugs in the ARM64 world; we have one of the GCC engineers on staff who generates the fixes and pushes them upstream. The latest issue was related to bitfields in structs when compiled for big-endian on ARM64.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-13 05:28 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <shmnhi$mct$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #81201 |
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote: > On 12/09/2021 21:10, Juha Nieminen wrote: >> >> There's no reason to use optimizations while writing code and testing it. > > There may be many! > > Unoptimised code being too slow or too big to run on the target is > common in real-time or pretend (i.e. Linux) real-time systems. Getting > more comprehensive error checking is another. Rather obviously you need to test that your program works when compiled with optimizations (there are situations where bugs manifest themselves only when optimizations are turned on). But wasn't my point. My point is that during development, when you are writing, testing and debugging your code, you rarely need to turn on optimizations. You can, of course (especially if it makes little difference in compilation speed), but at the point where -O0 takes 10 seconds to compile and -O3 takes 1 minute to compile, you might reconsider.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-13 09:23 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <shmua0$c5e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81235 |
On 13/09/2021 07:28, Juha Nieminen wrote: > Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote: >> On 12/09/2021 21:10, Juha Nieminen wrote: >>> >>> There's no reason to use optimizations while writing code and testing it. >> >> There may be many! >> >> Unoptimised code being too slow or too big to run on the target is >> common in real-time or pretend (i.e. Linux) real-time systems. Getting >> more comprehensive error checking is another. > > Rather obviously you need to test that your program works when compiled > with optimizations (there are situations where bugs manifest themselves > only when optimizations are turned on). > > But wasn't my point. My point is that during development, when you are > writing, testing and debugging your code, you rarely need to turn on > optimizations. You can, of course (especially if it makes little > difference in compilation speed), but at the point where -O0 takes > 10 seconds to compile and -O3 takes 1 minute to compile, you might > reconsider. > Such time differences are not impossible, I suppose, but very rare. It is not often that "gcc -O3" is a good choice - the code produced is seldom faster, and regularly slower, than "gcc -O2". It is usually only worth using if you have code that deals with large data amounts of data where auto-vectorisation helps. And even then, most people use it incorrectly - without additional flags to specify the target processor (or "-fmarch=native") you miss out on much of the possibilities. Otherwise you risk slowdowns due to the significantly larger code and higher cache usage, rather than speedups due to loop unrolling and the like. I'd only use -O3 for code that I have measured and tested to show that it is actually faster than using -O2. (And even then, I'd probably specify individual extra optimisation flags as pragmas in the code that benefits from them.) Just for fun, I've tested build times for a project I am working on. The complete build for the 140 object files (including dependency generation and linking, though compilation is the major effort) with different -O levels are: -O level real time user time ========================================= 0 20.8 s 1m 32 s 1 23.1 s 1m 43 s 2 24.3 s 1m 48 s 3 25.5 s 1m 52 s So going from -O2 down to -O0 might save about 20% of the compilation time - giving rubbish code, pointless testing, impenetrable assembly listings, and vastly weaker static analysis. Now, there might be unusual cases where there are extreme timing differences, but I believe these figures are not atypical. If you have particularly large source code files - as you might, for generated source code, simulation code, and a other niche uses - then inter-procedural optimisations with -O1 and above will definitely slow you down. In such cases, I'd add pragmas to disable the optimisations that scale badly with code size, and then use -O2.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-12 12:21 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <shkkc1$29b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81192 |
On 12/09/2021 11:10, Juha Nieminen wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >> I always compile with debugging information, and I regularly use >> breakpoints, stepping, assembly-level debug, etc. I /hate/ having to >> deal with unoptimised "gcc -O0" code - it is truly awful. You have vast >> amounts of useless extra code that hides the real action. In the >> assembly, the code to load and store variables from the stack, instead >> of registers, often outweighs the actual interesting stuff. >> Single-stepping through your important functions becomes far harder >> because all the little calls that should be inlined out of existence, >> become layers of calls that you might have to dig through. Most of the >> what you are looking for is drowned out in the noise. > > Most interactive debuggers support stepping into a function call, or > stepping over it (ie. call the function but don't break there and > just wait for it to return). They do indeed. But in the world of embedded development, things can get complicated. Stepping over functions works in some cases, but often there is interaction with interrupts, timers, hardware, etc., that means you simply cannot step like that. > >>> When debugging using an interactive debugger, the execution path >>> should follow the source code line-by-line, with *each* line included >>> and nothing optimized away. >> >> That was true 20 years ago, perhaps, with C. Not now, and not with C++. > > I don't see how it isn't true now. If there's a bug in your code, you > need to see and examine every line of code that could be the culprit. > If the compiler has done things at compile time and essentially > optimized the faulty line of code away (essentially "merging" it with > subsequent lines), you'll be drawn to the wrong line of code. The first > line of code that exhibits the wrong values may not be the one that's > actually creating the wrong values, because that line has been optimized > away. (The same applies to optimizing away function calls.) If the compiler is optimising away a line of code, and that is causing a problem, then the bug lies in the surrounding code that causes it to be optimised away. > >>> However, when compiling much larger projects, or when compiling on >>> a very inefficient platform, the difference can become substantial, >>> and detrimental to development if it's too long. >> >> Don't solve that by using weaker tools. Solve it by improving how you >> use the tools > > That's exactly what I'm doing by doing a fast "g++ -O0" compilation > instead of a slow "g++ -O3" compilation. > People clearly have different needs, experiences, and ideas. All I can tell you is that since "gcc -O0" does not work as a compiler that handles my needs for either static analysis or code generation, it is irrelevant how fast it runs - it is almost entirely useless to me. When I write code, I make mistakes sometimes. I want all the help I can get to avoid making mistakes, and to find the mistakes as soon as possible. One major help is the static analysis from a good compiler. I want that feedback as soon as I have finished writing a piece of code, not the next day after a nightly build. "gcc -O2" gives me what I need, "gcc -O0" does not. >> get better build systems to avoid unnecessary >> compilation, use ccache if you have build options or variations that you >> swap back and forth, use distcc to spread the load, explain to your boss >> why a Ryzen or even a ThreadRipper will save money overall as /your/ >> time costs more than the computer's time. "I don't use optimisation >> because it is too slow" is an excuse for hobby developers, not >> professionals. > > There's no reason to use optimizations while writing code and testing it. I'm sorry, but you are simply wrong. There are some kinds of programming where it doesn't matter how big and slow the result is. There are other kinds of programming where it /does/ matter. In my world, object code that is too big is broken - it will not fit on the device, and cannot possibly work. Object code that is too slow is broken - it will not do what it has to do within the time required. For many programmers, a major reason they are using C or C++ in the first place is because the efficiency of the results matters. Otherwise they would likely use languages that offer greater developer efficiency for many tasks, such as Python. (I'm not suggesting efficiency is the /only/ reason for using C or C++, but it is a major one.) Trying to do your development and testing without a care for the speed is then a very questionable strategy. I can happily believe that for /you/, and the kind of code /you/ work on, optimisation is not an issue. But that is not the case for a great many other programmers. And since using an optimised compiler - on appropriate hardware for a professional developer - is rarely an issue, it seems to me a very backwards idea to disable optimisation for a gain in build speed. (If you really find it helpful in debugging, then I can appreciate that as a justification.) Who cares if it takes 0.1 seconds or 2 seconds to compile the file you've just saved? It is vastly more important that you get good warning feedback after 2 seconds instead of the next day, and that you test the real code rather than a naïve build that hides many potential errors. > "I don't use optimization because it is too slow" is *perfectly valid*. > If it is too slow, and is slowing down your development, it's *good* > to make it faster. I doubt your boss will be unhappy with you developing > the program in less time. > > You can compile the final result with optimizations, of course. > >> It is better to only compile the bits that need to be compiled. Who >> cares how long a full build takes? > > In the example I provided the project consists of two source files > and one header file. It's very heavy to compile. Inclusion optimization > isn't of much help. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-10 05:29 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <4ec9cdbc-9b93-485f-8ccf-8dc6ac27b2a4n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #81133 |
On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 12:10:25 PM UTC+3, Juha Nieminen wrote: > David Brown <david...@hesbynett.no> wrote: > > All in all, I simply cannot see any point in software development in > > which a non-optimising (including "gcc -O0") or weak compiler is useful. > If we are talking about using a separate compiler from the one you intend > to build the final version with, then sure, there may be little sense > in using that (other than, perhaps, that other compiler having better > checks or diagnostics than the ones in your "main" compiler.) > > However, gcc -O0 is quite useful in development. For starters, when you > are interactively debugging (eg. with gdb, or any of the myriads of > debuggers in different IDEs), you usually don't want things like your > functions being inlined, loops unrolled, compile-time arithmetic > (other than, of course, that of constexpr/consteval functions), etc. > When debugging using an interactive debugger, the execution path > should follow the source code line-by-line, with *each* line included > and nothing optimized away. > > Of course there's also the question of compilation speed. When compiling > small or even medium-sized projects, we seldom tend to pay attention > to how fast "gcc -O0" compiles compared to "gcc -O3", especially since > we tend to have these supercomputers on our desks. > > However, when compiling much larger projects, or when compiling on > a very inefficient platform, the difference can become substantial, > and detrimental to development if it's too long. > > For example, I have a hobby project that has some ARM-specific code, > which I simply cannot compile nor run in my desktop computer. I need > an ARM system to compile it. The only ARM system where I can do this > easily is a Raspberry Pi. Few years ago I used to build code for ARMv7 Linux on my Windows desktop just fine. Didn't try ARMv8-aarch64 yet, but I will be surprised if it's not equally simple. > And even though it's the RPi 4, it's a > *slow* system. The project, even though it's not extraordinarly > large, takes quite a substantial amount of time to compile on the > Raspi. Here are some compile times with different optimization > levels of gcc: > > -O0: 30s > -O1: 43s > -O2: 1m 4s > -O3: 1m 30s > > As you might imagine, it's better to have the project compile in > 30 seconds rather than 1 minute and 30 seconds, whan you are > developing the code and constantly making changes to it that need > to be tested. (The 43 seconds of -O1 is bearable, but still the > 13 seconds longer compile time can be felt in the long run.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-10 12:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <shff2k$blt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81132 |
On 10/09/2021 09:02, David Brown wrote: > On 10/09/2021 01:07, Bart wrote: >> On 09/09/2021 22:51, Ian Collins wrote: >>> On 09/09/2021 23:40, Bart wrote: >> >>>> Optimisation is not important for the first step of getting /anything/ >>>> working, so that you can use a fast compiler, or turn off some options. >>>> But when you do need the extra speed, a single file gives you >>>> whole-program optimisation for free. >>> >>> Optimization may not be important initially, but error checking is. >> >> For development, certainly. But I'm mainly talking about a product or >> application someone may want to use, for which, for one reason or >> another, a ready-to-run binary is not available. > > As I see it, there are usually two main purposes in running a compiler. > > One is to build the code for a program (or library) that is already > developed, debugged, and tested, and has been distributed as source code > rather than an optimised pre-built binary. For that, you often want a > good optimising compiler to generate fast results. You are not > interested in warnings or generating debugger information, but the > result should be efficient in size and speed. > > The other is when /you/ are developing the code - and then you want your > compiler to help you in that work. For that, you need a compiler that > does a lot of analysis and static error checking. You also want the > results to be efficient - after all, that is often a prime reason for > using languages like C and C++. And you want the code you are debugging > and testing to be as close as possible to the code you are planning to ship. I can't agree there. During development, I want to run 100s of versions of a program a day, one every few seconds, as I make incremental changes. I just want something that will generate a new binary as quickly as possible. And for my stuff, I have a whole-program compiler that will do that in about the time it takes to press and release a key on my keyboard. There is a place for the sort of analysis and validation you mention, but surely not on /every single build/. Something you might do from time to time, or as a last resort (for example I might turn on validation within my memory allocator to see if anything is amiss, when I get stuck, but I can't have it enabled routinely because it slows down the app by 100 times). More typically, I might notice that some console output is annoyingly misaligned, or needs editing, so I will change one line and run it again until it looks right. I don't want to hang about it's reverified the 49,999 lines I haven't changed, or even the couple of thousand lines in that module. So I'd say that 99% of my builds will be in this third category. > All in all, I simply cannot see any point in software development in > which a non-optimising (including "gcc -O0") or weak compiler is useful. > There may be times in which a very small but reasonable compiler such > as tcc can be helpful - perhaps you have need of compiling a small > program on a very old and limited computer. tcc is about 30 times as fast as gcc -O3 on the programs relevant to me. The generated code is not significantly slower. Also, when I run C compilers on larger programs, it will usually be generated C code; the code will already have been verified. Here gcc brings no advantages; I'd only run it in order to use its optimiser. My (semi-serious) suggestion to the developers of gcc is to introduce a new optimisation option -O-1, one below -O0, that runs a bundled version of Tiny C. >> (I normally keep away from such features in a language, but my new >> intermediate language, if set to generate C source, will produce >> absolutely appalling code in a subset I call 'Linear-C'. That also >> /needs/ an optimising compiler to remove all the redundancy.) >> > > Then you are missing out. > > Part of the advantage of using good tools is that /you/, the developer, > can concentrate on writing clear and maintainable code, and let the > compiler worry about the details of turning it into optimal results. I take care of that by design of the language (see below). My main language is far less cluttered than C, let alone C++. If I want to use higher level types such as come with C++, I use the dynamically typed version of my language. > Compilation with optimisation leads to optimal code of a few dozen > instructions and clock cycles. Compilation without optimisation means > thousands of clock cycles and perhaps 10K of extra library code (on a > device with maybe 16K of flash memory). > > > In the C++ world, a compiler that can't inline functions is /useless/. > It is essential for code structure and code reuse. On my current C++ > project, targeting a high-end 32-bit ARM microcontroller, I use a set of > templates for abstracting IO pins. In my source code, I can write > "led_error.on();" I spent a few years using my language on the 8-bit Z80, where I was dealing with I/O devices all the time. I don't recall any problems in gettings things done despite not having all those features. And at the time, I was running the compiler /ON/ the device itself; you don't need to tell me how to write compact programs on such machines! (I think there was a thread on clc recently about efficient ways to write GETBIT/SETBITS routines. Someone posted some code in C++, using classes or templates or whatever, which was clunky, but apparently compiled down to a compact set of instructions. However my language can do that stuff directly: x := A.[i] # get bit i of A A.[i] := x # set bit i of A No need to first generate long-winded boilerplate code, then run multiple passes and employ inlining to reduce the code down to something sane.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "daniel...@gmail.com" <danielaparker@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-06 11:51 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > |
| Message-ID | <d0295137-72cb-4f65-b6b2-d8b6dc808da1n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #81061 |
On Monday, September 6, 2021 at 6:08:52 AM UTC-4, Paavo Helde wrote: > 06.09.2021 12:11 Miste...@stubborn.uk kirjutas: > > > Unless you're writing highly cross platform code there's zero reason to use > > cmake or autoconf at all. A Makefile for *nix is a lot simpler to use and > > debug. > Been there, done that. And I am sorry for the brain cells I have lost > over years when trying to force the Makefile system to work properly. > Unfortunately I never quite succeeded at, they always rebuilt either too > many or too few files, or both. > Agree totally. Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 05:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sgsaue$miv$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #81017 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > However, you are writing as though the GMP authors have a duty and a > responsibility to make life easier for any programmers, on any system, > with any preferences for how they want to get the library and make use > of it. No, I'm not writing as if I were saying that the GMP authors have some kind of "duty" to anything. What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. If they want the library to be the best and most popular and most widely available and used, they should make it easy to use in *all* the popular platforms, not just one. > They have no such duty. These are people who have got together > with a common need - for high-performance arbitrary precision arithmetic > - and decided they would get better results working together on a common > library than doing so separately. I'm sure they also enjoy helping > others, and feel it is a good thing to make their code available. > > They don't /owe/ you anything. They don't owe Windows developers > anything. They don't owe Linux developers, or Solaris developers, or > anyone else. You could say the same thing from almost any free project. Like Linux itself. "What? You expect security and security patches for Linux? They don't owe you anything! They don't have a duty to placate to you, and make your system secure. If you don't like it, don't use it!" That would be a sure way to kill Linux on its tracks.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 11:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgsq0d$b36$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81024 |
On 03/09/2021 07:13, Juha Nieminen wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >> However, you are writing as though the GMP authors have a duty and a >> responsibility to make life easier for any programmers, on any system, >> with any preferences for how they want to get the library and make use >> of it. > > No, I'm not writing as if I were saying that the GMP authors have some > kind of "duty" to anything. > > What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and > effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at > what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious > applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while > completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. > > If they want the library to be the best and most popular and most > widely available and used, they should make it easy to use in *all* > the popular platforms, not just one. First, what makes you think they want it to be popular? Some open source developers are motivated by that, but many are not - like anyone else, there are all kinds of different motivations for people. I don't know the people behind GMP in any way, and so any ideas about their motivations are pure speculation. But it is perfectly reasonable, and very common in open source, for people to write code that /they/ find useful, and make it available for others to use if they want. In most cases, they really don't care if people use /their/ library or something else. They are glad if people give them feedback or contribute to the project, but they don't see it as a competition to try to gain users. If supporting a different platform that is of no interest to them means lots of extra work, why should they be interested in it? But of course if someone wants to help out and contribute ports to another platform, that's great. And note that - despite "proof by repetitive assertion" - it is entirely possible to use GMP on Windows. Just for fun, I typed "pacman -S gmp-devel" into an MSYS2 terminal on my Windows system, copied and pasted a sample program from the first random "GMP tutorial" I came across, and it worked fine. It is pretty much exactly as simple as "apt-get install libgmp-dev" on Debian, which is how I would get GMP on my Linux system. > >> They have no such duty. These are people who have got together >> with a common need - for high-performance arbitrary precision arithmetic >> - and decided they would get better results working together on a common >> library than doing so separately. I'm sure they also enjoy helping >> others, and feel it is a good thing to make their code available. >> >> They don't /owe/ you anything. They don't owe Windows developers >> anything. They don't owe Linux developers, or Solaris developers, or >> anyone else. > > You could say the same thing from almost any free project. Like Linux > itself. > > "What? You expect security and security patches for Linux? They don't > owe you anything! They don't have a duty to placate to you, and make > your system secure. If you don't like it, don't use it!" > > That would be a sure way to kill Linux on its tracks. > Who do you think makes the huge majority of security patches for Linux? (Or in fact, the great majority of any other code in the Linux kernel?) People who get /paid/ to do the job. They /do/ owe you something (though it is often very indirectly).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 11:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sgt0cc$1s2s$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #81026 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >> What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and >> effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at >> what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious >> applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while >> completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. > > First, what makes you think they want it to be popular? That doesn't actually refute what I wrote. If they don't care if the library becomes popular and widely used, moreso they are utterly stupid for spending so much time, effort and research on a niche project.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 13:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgt15i$p1m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81027 |
On 03/09/2021 13:19, Juha Nieminen wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >>> What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and >>> effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at >>> what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious >>> applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while >>> completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. >> >> First, what makes you think they want it to be popular? > > That doesn't actually refute what I wrote. If they don't care if the library > becomes popular and widely used, moreso they are utterly stupid for spending > so much time, effort and research on a niche project. > I recommend you contact the authors of the project to tell them how stupid you think they are. I'm sure that will change their minds and you can look forward to pre-build Windows DLLs to suit your preferences. And I am confident that if you and Bart get together and throw some more insults at them, they'll make sure tcc and Bart's own C compiler are fully supported.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 15:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sgtcd2$9rg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81028 |
On 03/09/2021 12:33, David Brown wrote: > On 03/09/2021 13:19, Juha Nieminen wrote: >> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >>>> What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and >>>> effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at >>>> what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious >>>> applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while >>>> completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. >>> >>> First, what makes you think they want it to be popular? >> >> That doesn't actually refute what I wrote. If they don't care if the library >> becomes popular and widely used, moreso they are utterly stupid for spending >> so much time, effort and research on a niche project. >> > > I recommend you contact the authors of the project to tell them how > stupid you think they are. I'm sure that will change their minds and > you can look forward to pre-build Windows DLLs to suit your preferences. > And I am confident that if you and Bart get together and throw some > more insults at them, they'll make sure tcc and Bart's own C compiler > are fully supported. > The mini-gmp.c version builds with tcc and bcc. And DMC and lccwin. But the main product doesn't. Even getting around the obvious difficulties, it relies a lot on assembly code. Whether that is mainly with .s files, or it uses inline ASM which would be incompatible with other compilers, I don't know. One time I tried it, I jumped through all the hoops, installing MSYS etc, let it grind away for half an hour, and then it failed with a mysterious error. So now what? Another time it actually completed. But if it had worked, where was the output; I couldn't find it anywhere! You'd think that, after reams of screen output, it would tell you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 17:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sgtmlr$mb9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #81028 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > On 03/09/2021 13:19, Juha Nieminen wrote: >> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >>>> What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and >>>> effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at >>>> what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious >>>> applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while >>>> completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. >>> >>> First, what makes you think they want it to be popular? >> >> That doesn't actually refute what I wrote. If they don't care if the library >> becomes popular and widely used, moreso they are utterly stupid for spending >> so much time, effort and research on a niche project. > > I recommend you contact the authors of the project to tell them how > stupid you think they are. I'm sure that will change their minds and > you can look forward to pre-build Windows DLLs to suit your preferences. Them not changing their minds still doesn't refute what I said. I don't even understand what you are arguing against.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 17:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <KmtYI.24821$jm6.2934@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #81033 |
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> writes: >David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >> On 03/09/2021 13:19, Juha Nieminen wrote: >>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >>>>> What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and >>>>> effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at >>>>> what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious >>>>> applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while >>>>> completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. >>>> >>>> First, what makes you think they want it to be popular? >>> >>> That doesn't actually refute what I wrote. If they don't care if the library >>> becomes popular and widely used, moreso they are utterly stupid for spending >>> so much time, effort and research on a niche project. >> >> I recommend you contact the authors of the project to tell them how >> stupid you think they are. I'm sure that will change their minds and >> you can look forward to pre-build Windows DLLs to suit your preferences. > >Them not changing their minds still doesn't refute what I said. > >I don't even understand what you are arguing against. You make strong statements regarding the motivations of the authors of the GNU Multiple Precision library. Have you ever met or spoken with any of them? How do you know what motivated them to write GMP? Most open source programmers that I know and have worked with over the past forty years are interested in writing something useful (often as a result of an immediate need) to themselves. And truth be told, few of them care much about the Microsoft software ecosystem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 22:23 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sgu3ol$kkd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81035 |
On 03/09/2021 18:58, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> writes: >> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >>> On 03/09/2021 13:19, Juha Nieminen wrote: >>>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >>>>>> What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and >>>>>> effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at >>>>>> what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious >>>>>> applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while >>>>>> completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. >>>>> >>>>> First, what makes you think they want it to be popular? >>>> >>>> That doesn't actually refute what I wrote. If they don't care if the library >>>> becomes popular and widely used, moreso they are utterly stupid for spending >>>> so much time, effort and research on a niche project. >>> >>> I recommend you contact the authors of the project to tell them how >>> stupid you think they are. I'm sure that will change their minds and >>> you can look forward to pre-build Windows DLLs to suit your preferences. >> >> Them not changing their minds still doesn't refute what I said. >> >> I don't even understand what you are arguing against. > > You make strong statements regarding the motivations of > the authors of the GNU Multiple Precision library. Have > you ever met or spoken with any of them? How do you know > what motivated them to write GMP? > > Most open source programmers that I know and have worked > with over the past forty years are interested in writing > something useful (often as a result of an immediate need) > to themselves. That's me. My projects are compilers, assemblers and interpreters (I've designed out linkers!), but at a human scale. Designed for Windows, there was a phase when I made them available to Linux users via a C intermediate file. Building one of my projects was little different to building hello.c on either OS. Yes, it took some effort to make it that simple, but I thought it was worth doing because of my own experience of trying to build open source stuff. > And truth be told, few of them care much about the Microsoft > software ecosystem. Just pretend there isn't one. That means some dependencies to be installed, but if using a C intermediate, a 0.2MB compiler like tcc will do the job. You don't need a 10000MB VS installation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-04 12:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgvha9$757$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81033 |
On 03/09/2021 19:40, Juha Nieminen wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >> On 03/09/2021 13:19, Juha Nieminen wrote: >>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >>>>> What' I'm saying is that it's utterly *stupid* to spend so much time and >>>>> effort to create a library with the intent of being the absolute best at >>>>> what it's doing, intended for a very wide audience and serious >>>>> applications... and then limit its use to one particular platform while >>>>> completely ignoring one of the most popular platforms. >>>> >>>> First, what makes you think they want it to be popular? >>> >>> That doesn't actually refute what I wrote. If they don't care if the library >>> becomes popular and widely used, moreso they are utterly stupid for spending >>> so much time, effort and research on a niche project. >> >> I recommend you contact the authors of the project to tell them how >> stupid you think they are. I'm sure that will change their minds and >> you can look forward to pre-build Windows DLLs to suit your preferences. > > Them not changing their minds still doesn't refute what I said. > > I don't even understand what you are arguing against. > I am arguing against your bizarre complaints and demands that the GMP authors /owe/ you a nice windows binary, that they are stupid for not providing it, that they are somehow politically motivated to hate Windows and they therefore work against it. I'm suggesting you take your weird conspiracies and insulting language to the people who can actually answer your questions, and see what they have to say in response. Perhaps you'll learn something.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-06 05:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sh49n7$1ft7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #81044 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > I am arguing against your bizarre complaints and demands that the GMP > authors /owe/ you a nice windows binary, that they are stupid for not > providing it, that they are somehow politically motivated to hate > Windows and they therefore work against it. For starters, I have nowhere said or implies that they "owe" anything. I said that if they don't support Windows, they are being utterly stupid. Secondly, nowhere have I said anything about a "windows binary". Where have I said *anything* of the sort? What I have said is that they should make it easy to *compile* the library for a Windows project. (Why do you think I wrote that long rant about the configure script?) > I'm suggesting you take your weird conspiracies and insulting language > to the people who can actually answer your questions, and see what they > have to say in response. Perhaps you'll learn something. Conspiracies? What conspiracies? The only thing I said is that if they don't care about developers who are using Windows, they are being stupid. And yes, I *am* insulting them for that, if it's indeed so. They *are* being utterly stupid. I don't care if you find that "insulting".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 11 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 9 10 [11] 12 13 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web