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 3 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 16 Next page →
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 20:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgogmq$l7e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #80970 |
On 01/09/2021 16:31, James Kuyper wrote: > On 9/1/21 5:07 AM, David Brown wrote: > ... >> To get you started, here is a 32-bit DSP: >> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Harvard_Architecture_Single-Chip_Computer> >> >> <https://www.analog.com/en/products/audio-video/audio-signal-processors/sharc-audio-processors-socs.html> >> >> There are C and C++ compilers available. >> >> There is no direct access to octets in the architecture - all hardware >> accesses to data are in 32-bit words. To my knowledge (and I've only >> had very indirect involvement with these particular devices, I haven't >> programmed them), the compilers use CHAR_BIT 32 and thus void*, char* >> and int* pointers are all the same size. It would certainly be possible >> to be more sophisticated, using CHAR_BIT as 8 and providing char* >> pointers that have an extra 2 bits for the offset within the word. > > It would be more relevant if you could have identified an implementation > that actually does that, rather then merely saying that such an > implementation is possible. > It would, and I'd have said if I knew of such an implementation. > >> Another microcontroller family with CHAR_BIT 16 that I have used is >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_TMS320>. While the >> original 16-bit families are rarely used for serious DSP these days, >> they are some of the most popular chips for high reliability and high >> temperature applications. > > CHAR_BIT==16 isn't the directly relevant issue. Are there C++ > implementations targeting that platform with sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*)? > I don't know of any, nor have I said I did. The thread has strayed as Bonita has denied the existence of pretty much any processor that doesn't follow her very limited idea of what what she thinks a modern processor is. I have just been showing some real-life counter examples, even though they are not as extreme as the OP was hoping for.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 15:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <uUMXI.17686$F26.2006@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #80949 |
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> writes: >Am 01.09.2021 um 09:26 schrieb David Brown: >> On 01/09/2021 07:25, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> Am 31.08.2021 um 22:37 schrieb Vir Campestris: >>>> On 31/08/2021 18:04, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>>> There is no person designing such CPUs today and there will never be. >>>> >>>> Never is a long time. >>>> >>>> I've worked on systems where the difference between two addresses is 1 >>>> bit, and 36 bits, and several values in between. >>> >>> That must be decades ago. >>> And currently and in the future no one designs such silly CPUs. >> >> It must be nice to have such a solid confidence in being sure of >> everything you say, despite such limited knowledge. With your >> fortune-telling abilities and unwavering surety in your predictions, >> I think you are wasted in the programming world. Perhaps a career >> in politics would be better? Or start your own religion? Maybe >> you should try your luck as a professional lottery winner. > >Name a current CPU with the discussed properties ! >Giv me a link to the CPU-documentation. Did you not read the link to the Unisys Clearpath C compiler manual? The computers are still being built and still being used in the real world. 48-bit words. Pointers are not interchangable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 07:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <sgo43b$nt1$1@redfloyd.dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #80928 |
On 8/31/2021 1:37 PM, Vir Campestris wrote: > On 31/08/2021 18:04, Bonita Montero wrote: >> There is no person designing such CPUs today and there will never be. > > Never is a long time. > > I've worked on systems where the difference between two addresses is 1 > bit, and 36 bits, and several values in between. > > The 1 bit was a GPU which had hardware support for variables of > arbitrary numbers of bits. Very handy for our 3 bit pixels. And yes, we > ran C on it. TI-340x0 series? I worked with that one as well.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 15:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ATMXI.17685$F26.3573@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #80928 |
Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> writes: >On 31/08/2021 18:04, Bonita Montero wrote: >> There is no person designing such CPUs today and there will never be. > >Never is a long time. Andy, you have been successfully trolled. Our german friend is rather clueless about the industry.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 09:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <sgoagm$65f$2@redfloyd.dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #80973 |
On 9/1/2021 8:21 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> writes: >> On 31/08/2021 18:04, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> There is no person designing such CPUs today and there will never be. >> >> Never is a long time. > > Andy, you have been successfully trolled. > > Our german friend is rather clueless about the industry. > Remember the "All-the-world's a vax" heresy? (https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/ten-commandments.html)? Ms. Montero seems to be in the All the world's Windows sect.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 18:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sgoc7u$klk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #80980 |
On 01/09/2021 17:41, red floyd wrote: > On 9/1/2021 8:21 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> writes: >>> On 31/08/2021 18:04, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>> There is no person designing such CPUs today and there will never be. >>> >>> Never is a long time. >> >> Andy, you have been successfully trolled. >> >> Our german friend is rather clueless about the industry. >> > > Remember the "All-the-world's a vax" heresy? > (https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/ten-commandments.html)? > > Ms. Montero seems to be in the All the world's Windows sect. Why not? Everyone else seems to assume that the whole world is running some Unix-based system. Try building GMP on pure Windows (no CYGWIN, MSYS2 or WSL to make it emulate Linux). GMP is a numerical library; how does the OS come into it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 18:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <QgPXI.17692$F26.495@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #80981 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >On 01/09/2021 17:41, red floyd wrote: >> On 9/1/2021 8:21 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>> Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> writes: >>>> On 31/08/2021 18:04, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>>> There is no person designing such CPUs today and there will never be. >>>> >>>> Never is a long time. >>> >>> Andy, you have been successfully trolled. >>> >>> Our german friend is rather clueless about the industry. >>> >> >> Remember the "All-the-world's a vax" heresy? >> (https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/ten-commandments.html)? >> >> Ms. Montero seems to be in the All the world's Windows sect. > >Why not? Everyone else seems to assume that the whole world is running >some Unix-based system. > >Try building GMP on pure Windows (no CYGWIN, MSYS2 or WSL to make it >emulate Linux). GMP is a numerical library; how does the OS come into it? Ask the developers of GMP. It was their choice. Given the 'G' in the name, one could expect that they had no interest in supporting Windows.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 18:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sgogmu$rpo$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #80986 |
Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: > Ask the developers of GMP. It was their choice. Given the 'G' > in the name, one could expect that they had no interest in supporting > Windows. GMP is intended to be a serious extremely efficient multi-precision arithmetic library aimed at all kinds of work, including things like serious scientific numeric analysis, and it's being used by a lot of software out there. It would be rather insane to exclude one of the most popular (if not the most popular) operating systems because of some silly principle.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 19:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t7QXI.8719$6U3.1972@fx43.iad> |
| In reply to | #80991 |
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> writes: >Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: >> Ask the developers of GMP. It was their choice. Given the 'G' >> in the name, one could expect that they had no interest in supporting >> Windows. > >GMP is intended to be a serious extremely efficient multi-precision >arithmetic library aimed at all kinds of work, including things like >serious scientific numeric analysis, and it's being used by a lot >of software out there. > >It would be rather insane to exclude one of the most popular (if >not the most popular) operating systems because of some silly >principle. If they were in it for profit, perhaps. But it's more likely they find open-source as a philosophy inconsistent with active support for proprietary closed operating environments.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 21:36 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgokn7$hru$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #80996 |
Am 01.09.21 um 21:02 schrieb Scott Lurndal: > Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> writes: >> Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: >>> Ask the developers of GMP. It was their choice. Given the 'G' >>> in the name, one could expect that they had no interest in supporting >>> Windows. >> >> GMP is intended to be a serious extremely efficient multi-precision >> arithmetic library aimed at all kinds of work, including things like >> serious scientific numeric analysis, and it's being used by a lot >> of software out there. >> >> It would be rather insane to exclude one of the most popular (if >> not the most popular) operating systems because of some silly >> principle. > > If they were in it for profit, perhaps. But it's more likely they > find open-source as a philosophy inconsistent with active support for > proprietary closed operating environments. > And, even more likely, there is no volunteer available to maintain a Windows-only alternative Makefile / build solution. They write on their page "GMP's main target platforms are Unix-type systems, such as GNU/Linux, Solaris, HP-UX, Mac OS X/Darwin, BSD, AIX, etc. It also is known to work on Windows in both 32-bit and 64-bit mode." So you *can* run it on Windows. MSYS2, btw, is not some sort of Linux emulation for Windows, as it might seem and opposed to Cygwin or WSL. If you compile software using MSYS2, you use the tools for building, therefore you can use GNU make, bash , autoconf etc. but the resulting binary is a true Windows binary. autoconf even knows how to use the cl compiler (MSVC++) instead of gcc. I haven't tried GMP, though. Usual developers don't find it particularly exciting to write build scripts, but if you'd volunteer to write and maintain good Windows Makefiles, probably they would accept a pull request. Christian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-02 06:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sgpsmq$1kl4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #81001 |
Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> wrote: > And, even more likely, there is no volunteer available to maintain a > Windows-only alternative Makefile / build solution. They write on their > page "GMP's main target platforms are Unix-type systems, such as > GNU/Linux, Solaris, HP-UX, Mac OS X/Darwin, BSD, AIX, etc. It also is > known to work on Windows in both 32-bit and 64-bit mode." > > So you *can* run it on Windows. MSYS2, btw, is not some sort of Linux > emulation for Windows, as it might seem and opposed to Cygwin or WSL. You can run *what* on Windows? GMP is not a program. It's a library, which you can use in your programs. It's just a question of how many hurdles the developers have put to make it possible to compile it so that you can use it in your program. (One thing I really detest in the unix style source code design is the ubiquitous all-encompassing configure script, which is quite often used even in projects that wouldn't need one. Essentially, the library is, for all intents and purposes, being "held hostage" by its configure script. It won't compile as-is unless you run the configure script first, and the script will only run on a unix environment, and generally will only be able to configure the library to be compiled for the current host operating system. Depending on the complexity of the project, trying to compile it without running the script may be almost insurmountable, as it would require manually defining millions of things, manually creating very large files, and so on. This is not only detrimental to trying to compile the project for a non-unix platform (even if the source code of the project could well be 100% portable without any need for this), but it also makes it extraordinarily difficult to cross-compile it to another platform than the current one. Such as trying to use such a library in an iOS project. I know. I have pulled my hair many times because of this. It has taught me to *hate* unix-style configure scripts, and them keeping completely portable libraries as hostages.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-02 11:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgq5qr$vmk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81015 |
On 02/09/2021 08:58, Juha Nieminen wrote: > Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> wrote: >> And, even more likely, there is no volunteer available to maintain a >> Windows-only alternative Makefile / build solution. They write on their >> page "GMP's main target platforms are Unix-type systems, such as >> GNU/Linux, Solaris, HP-UX, Mac OS X/Darwin, BSD, AIX, etc. It also is >> known to work on Windows in both 32-bit and 64-bit mode." >> >> So you *can* run it on Windows. MSYS2, btw, is not some sort of Linux >> emulation for Windows, as it might seem and opposed to Cygwin or WSL. > > You can run *what* on Windows? GMP is not a program. It's a library, > which you can use in your programs. > > It's just a question of how many hurdles the developers have put to > make it possible to compile it so that you can use it in your program. > > (One thing I really detest in the unix style source code design is the <snip> > hostages.) > I doubt if anyone will try to suggest that configure scripts are always written perfectly, or that even that it is a good way to handle cross-system compatibility in modern times. 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. 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. If other people want to make GMP easier to install on Windows, that's great. If other people want to make it easer to install on Linux, or anything else, that's great too. Only a small fraction of Linux users would install it by downloading and doing the ".configure && make && make install" dance. Most would do "apt-get install libgmp-dev", or similar.) And it turns out that people /have/ made things easier for getting GMP on Windows. If you use cygwin, the library is there. If you use msys2, the library is there. If you want to use it from MSVC, instructions and project settings are available. If you want to use it from Python, or PHP, or another language, packages are available. Perhaps things won't work immediately, or there are complications that you need to work through. But frankly, if you are not able to figure it out then you are probably not in a position to make much use of such a library anyway. One thing we can be sure about, however. If someone provides a library like this "in the unix way", it might be difficult to use on a Windows system, but it will be possible (baring unix-specific features). If they were to make a Windows library in "the Windows way", it can't be used on anything else. Hell, it probably won't even be usable if you don't have MSVC, which in turn tries to push you to the latest updates of the latest version of Windows.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-02 14:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87a6kuhchx.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #81017 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
[...]
> I doubt if anyone will try to suggest that configure scripts are always
> written perfectly, or that even that it is a good way to handle
> cross-system compatibility in modern times.
It's also worth pointing out that configure scripts are not hand-written
and are not expected to be maintained in that form. For example the
configure script for the bash shell is about 22,000 lines, but it's
generated from a much smaller configure.ac, and it's likely a lot of
automation (or at least copy-and-paste) went into writing that. The
generated configure script is included in the *.tar.gz file in which
*nix source packages are usually distributed because it means the user
who builds it doesn't need to have the tools that create the configure
script.
Think of the configure script as generated code that happens to run
under a shell.
The configure script is designed to be portable to Unix-like systems (a
Bourne-like shell is required to run it). The complexity goes back to
days when there was more variety in the Unix ecosystem than there is
today. A configure script will likely check for features that could be
assumed to be universally available today, and for platforms that hardly
exist anymore.
The inner workings of the autoconf system are almost certainly more
complicated than they needs to be, but 99% of people who use it aren't
affected by that complexity. Run "configure&&make&&make install" and
you're done.
That's unfortunate if you want to install an autoconf-based package on a
system that doesn't have a Bourne-like shell, but nobody is obligated to
make that easy.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-02 23:31 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sgrjcc$lhj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81022 |
On 02/09/2021 22:51, Keith Thompson wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: > [...] >> I doubt if anyone will try to suggest that configure scripts are always >> written perfectly, or that even that it is a good way to handle >> cross-system compatibility in modern times. > > It's also worth pointing out that configure scripts are not hand-written > and are not expected to be maintained in that form. For example the > configure script for the bash shell is about 22,000 lines, but it's > generated from a much smaller configure.ac, and it's likely a lot of > automation (or at least copy-and-paste) went into writing that. The > generated configure script is included in the *.tar.gz file in which > *nix source packages are usually distributed because it means the user > who builds it doesn't need to have the tools that create the configure > script. > > Think of the configure script as generated code that happens to run > under a shell. > > The configure script is designed to be portable to Unix-like systems (a > Bourne-like shell is required to run it). The complexity goes back to > days when there was more variety in the Unix ecosystem than there is > today. A configure script will likely check for features that could be > assumed to be universally available today, and for platforms that hardly > exist anymore. > > The inner workings of the autoconf system are almost certainly more > complicated than they needs to be, but 99% of people who use it aren't > affected by that complexity. Run "configure&&make&&make install" and > you're done. When I built A68G (an Algol68 interpreter) on Linux, the whole process took 5 minutes (300 seconds), most of that probably spent running 100s of pointless tests via that configuration file. This is for a program consisting of about 70K lines of C. If I just build those 70K lines directly (in about 12 modules, after prising that information out of the make file), then a fast C compiler can build it in about 1 second, on Windows.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 11:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgsoui$43t$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81022 |
On 02/09/2021 23:51, Keith Thompson wrote: > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: > [...] >> I doubt if anyone will try to suggest that configure scripts are always >> written perfectly, or that even that it is a good way to handle >> cross-system compatibility in modern times. > > It's also worth pointing out that configure scripts are not hand-written > and are not expected to be maintained in that form. For example the > configure script for the bash shell is about 22,000 lines, but it's > generated from a much smaller configure.ac, and it's likely a lot of > automation (or at least copy-and-paste) went into writing that. The > generated configure script is included in the *.tar.gz file in which > *nix source packages are usually distributed because it means the user > who builds it doesn't need to have the tools that create the configure > script. > > Think of the configure script as generated code that happens to run > under a shell. > > The configure script is designed to be portable to Unix-like systems (a > Bourne-like shell is required to run it). The complexity goes back to > days when there was more variety in the Unix ecosystem than there is > today. A configure script will likely check for features that could be > assumed to be universally available today, and for platforms that hardly > exist anymore. > > The inner workings of the autoconf system are almost certainly more > complicated than they needs to be, but 99% of people who use it aren't > affected by that complexity. Run "configure&&make&&make install" and > you're done. > Yes. (And while I know this, I agree it is worth pointing out.) > That's unfortunate if you want to install an autoconf-based package on a > system that doesn't have a Bourne-like shell, but nobody is obligated to > make that easy. > However, even for people doing the configuration on the most standard and well-known POSIX systems around, the system is still a bottleneck. These configure scripts do not scale well, and they do not parallelise well. So on a modern multi-core system, it is common for the "./configure" part to take a lot longer than the actual compilation. When working with bigger builds, such as making complete embedded Linux systems, it is frustrating to see so much of the time taken by so many configure scripts endlessly checking that you have a compiler that can handle C90 and other checks that haven't been relevant for decades. I can fully appreciate the usefulness of autoconf, and I can fully appreciate that few projects that use it will want to spend the time and effort needed to change to some other method. What I'd like to see is autoconf get some shortcuts to speed up the system. It could check your compiler - if it is a modern gcc, it can skip most of the other tests. Let those that want to build using tcc, or other unusual or limited compilers wade through all the tests, as the tests might fail. Let those that use common and standard solutions get their results fast. Alternatively, there could be a system daemon that keeps cached results. Autoconf scripts would first ask the daemon for answers, and only bother running checks if that failed (and then it would pass the answers back to the daemon). Fall back to old methods when there is no daemon. As you say, the complexity of the scripts don't matter to most people. Few care if the shell script is 20K lines. But that doesn't mean it is fun to wait for it to run!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 15:35 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sgtbre$5en$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81025 |
On 03/09/2021 10:12, David Brown wrote: > On 02/09/2021 23:51, Keith Thompson wrote: >> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: >> [...] >>> I doubt if anyone will try to suggest that configure scripts are always >>> written perfectly, or that even that it is a good way to handle >>> cross-system compatibility in modern times. >> >> It's also worth pointing out that configure scripts are not hand-written >> and are not expected to be maintained in that form. For example the >> configure script for the bash shell is about 22,000 lines, but it's >> generated from a much smaller configure.ac, and it's likely a lot of >> automation (or at least copy-and-paste) went into writing that. The >> generated configure script is included in the *.tar.gz file in which >> *nix source packages are usually distributed because it means the user >> who builds it doesn't need to have the tools that create the configure >> script. >> >> Think of the configure script as generated code that happens to run >> under a shell. >> >> The configure script is designed to be portable to Unix-like systems (a >> Bourne-like shell is required to run it). The complexity goes back to >> days when there was more variety in the Unix ecosystem than there is >> today. A configure script will likely check for features that could be >> assumed to be universally available today, and for platforms that hardly >> exist anymore. >> >> The inner workings of the autoconf system are almost certainly more >> complicated than they needs to be, but 99% of people who use it aren't >> affected by that complexity. Run "configure&&make&&make install" and >> you're done. >> > > Yes. (And while I know this, I agree it is worth pointing out.) > >> That's unfortunate if you want to install an autoconf-based package on a >> system that doesn't have a Bourne-like shell, but nobody is obligated to >> make that easy. >> > > However, even for people doing the configuration on the most standard > and well-known POSIX systems around, the system is still a bottleneck. > These configure scripts do not scale well, and they do not parallelise > well. So on a modern multi-core system, it is common for the > "./configure" part to take a lot longer than the actual compilation. > When working with bigger builds, such as making complete embedded Linux > systems, it is frustrating to see so much of the time taken by so many > configure scripts endlessly checking that you have a compiler that can > handle C90 and other checks that haven't been relevant for decades. > > I can fully appreciate the usefulness of autoconf, and I can fully > appreciate that few projects that use it will want to spend the time and > effort needed to change to some other method. What I'd like to see is > autoconf get some shortcuts to speed up the system. It could check your > compiler - if it is a modern gcc, it can skip most of the other tests. > Let those that want to build using tcc, or other unusual or limited > compilers wade through all the tests, as the tests might fail. Let > those that use common and standard solutions get their results fast. > > Alternatively, there could be a system daemon that keeps cached results. > Autoconf scripts would first ask the daemon for answers, and only > bother running checks if that failed (and then it would pass the answers > back to the daemon). Fall back to old methods when there is no daemon. > > As you say, the complexity of the scripts don't matter to most people. > Few care if the shell script is 20K lines. But that doesn't mean it is > fun to wait for it to run! > You're taking my point of view for a change! I wonder what reason for that is; maybe because this time it affects you? I don't like such scripts because they are a major obstacle to building the program. They don't actually appear to do anything (what is the actual output; tell me what's expected, and I'll take care of it). And executing 30,500 lines of pointless script code is a total joke. While the capabilities of gmp are great, either someone else is taking care of the distribution, or they just don't care. My Windows gcc/tdm installion happens to include a libgmp*.dll file (but not gmp.h), presumably for internal use of gmp. It didn't seem to be a problem to create that binary on a machine other than the one it's going to run on (which goes for the 100 other binaries too). So why put so much emphasis on building from source? Windows is a highly stable platform, unlike the million varieties of Linux; /that's/ why source is favoured in that case.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 16:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgtcg9$ala$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81029 |
On 03/09/2021 16:35, Bart wrote: > On 03/09/2021 10:12, David Brown wrote: >> On 02/09/2021 23:51, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: >>> [...] >>>> I doubt if anyone will try to suggest that configure scripts are always >>>> written perfectly, or that even that it is a good way to handle >>>> cross-system compatibility in modern times. >>> >>> It's also worth pointing out that configure scripts are not hand-written >>> and are not expected to be maintained in that form. For example the >>> configure script for the bash shell is about 22,000 lines, but it's >>> generated from a much smaller configure.ac, and it's likely a lot of >>> automation (or at least copy-and-paste) went into writing that. The >>> generated configure script is included in the *.tar.gz file in which >>> *nix source packages are usually distributed because it means the user >>> who builds it doesn't need to have the tools that create the configure >>> script. >>> >>> Think of the configure script as generated code that happens to run >>> under a shell. >>> >>> The configure script is designed to be portable to Unix-like systems (a >>> Bourne-like shell is required to run it). The complexity goes back to >>> days when there was more variety in the Unix ecosystem than there is >>> today. A configure script will likely check for features that could be >>> assumed to be universally available today, and for platforms that hardly >>> exist anymore. >>> >>> The inner workings of the autoconf system are almost certainly more >>> complicated than they needs to be, but 99% of people who use it aren't >>> affected by that complexity. Run "configure&&make&&make install" and >>> you're done. >>> >> >> Yes. (And while I know this, I agree it is worth pointing out.) >> >>> That's unfortunate if you want to install an autoconf-based package on a >>> system that doesn't have a Bourne-like shell, but nobody is obligated to >>> make that easy. >>> >> >> However, even for people doing the configuration on the most standard >> and well-known POSIX systems around, the system is still a bottleneck. >> These configure scripts do not scale well, and they do not parallelise >> well. So on a modern multi-core system, it is common for the >> "./configure" part to take a lot longer than the actual compilation. >> When working with bigger builds, such as making complete embedded Linux >> systems, it is frustrating to see so much of the time taken by so many >> configure scripts endlessly checking that you have a compiler that can >> handle C90 and other checks that haven't been relevant for decades. >> >> I can fully appreciate the usefulness of autoconf, and I can fully >> appreciate that few projects that use it will want to spend the time and >> effort needed to change to some other method. What I'd like to see is >> autoconf get some shortcuts to speed up the system. It could check your >> compiler - if it is a modern gcc, it can skip most of the other tests. >> Let those that want to build using tcc, or other unusual or limited >> compilers wade through all the tests, as the tests might fail. Let >> those that use common and standard solutions get their results fast. >> >> Alternatively, there could be a system daemon that keeps cached results. >> Autoconf scripts would first ask the daemon for answers, and only >> bother running checks if that failed (and then it would pass the answers >> back to the daemon). Fall back to old methods when there is no daemon. >> >> As you say, the complexity of the scripts don't matter to most people. >> Few care if the shell script is 20K lines. But that doesn't mean it is >> fun to wait for it to run! >> > > You're taking my point of view for a change! Not quite, no. In particular, I agree with Keith that the size of the configuration script does not matter, and it is not intended to be human readable (at least not for autoconf scripts). And I see their point and usefulness. I don't suggest getting rid of them - I suggest modernising them. > > I wonder what reason for that is; maybe because this time it affects you? > > I don't like such scripts because they are a major obstacle to building > the program. They don't actually appear to do anything (what is the > actual output; tell me what's expected, and I'll take care of it). > > And executing 30,500 lines of pointless script code is a total joke. > > While the capabilities of gmp are great, either someone else is taking > care of the distribution, or they just don't care. > > My Windows gcc/tdm installion happens to include a libgmp*.dll file (but > not gmp.h), presumably for internal use of gmp. It didn't seem to be a > problem to create that binary on a machine other than the one it's going > to run on (which goes for the 100 other binaries too). Generally package-based installations distinguish between "development" versions of libraries and simple run-time versions. A key point is that the development version will include headers, and perhaps also debug information, sample code, documentation, etc. Thus on Debian, "libgmp" contains the .so files, "libgmp-dev" contains the headers. > > So why put so much emphasis on building from source? Windows is a highly > stable platform, unlike the million varieties of Linux; /that's/ why > source is favoured in that case. The GMP developers write the source, test the source, and provide the source for others. Packagers can put together binary (or source) packages optimised and conveniently arranged for different systems. That's the way open source normally works. So it is not the GMP developers that make a Debian package, but someone who understands the Debian packaging system that handles it (that person may or may not be a libgmp user, or perhaps even a libgmp developer). The same goes for the msys2 and cygwin packager, and the FreeBSD folk, and so on. Some people prefer to use the source for various reasons. That can include getting a better understanding of the package, debugging it or improving it, generating optimised binaries for their particular processor (that can make quite a difference for some code), etc. In the inevitable car analogies, the library developers make engines. Different car manufacturers can take those engines and put them into cars. Some people like to get the engines separately because they are making unusual or specialised cars. But the engine manufacturers don't have any obligations to make complete cars - even though in some cases they are part of a car manufacturer company.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 22:01 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <sgtrea$r6f$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81029 |
03.09.2021 17:35 Bart kirjutas: > So why put so much emphasis on building from source? Windows is a highly > stable platform, unlike the million varieties of Linux; /that's/ why > source is favoured in that case. In those million varieties of Linux, there is usually no need to build from source. There are good chances that either 'zypper install <package>' or 'apt-get install <package>' will do the trick. In this sense, building from source is more appropriate in Windows, where you never know if some random DLL found in the intertubes is OK for your system and does not contain any unsupported opcodes or hidden viruses. However, building from source is essential if you want to know and control what exactly goes into the final product, and to be able to resolve any problems related to third-party libraries. With some libraries (looking at you, libtiff) it is not even possible to understand how to use the library without seeing the sources.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-03 20:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sgtu0e$d7v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81036 |
On 03/09/2021 20:01, Paavo Helde wrote: > 03.09.2021 17:35 Bart kirjutas: >> So why put so much emphasis on building from source? Windows is a >> highly stable platform, unlike the million varieties of Linux; >> /that's/ why source is favoured in that case. > > In those million varieties of Linux, there is usually no need to build > from source. There are good chances that either 'zypper install > <package>' or 'apt-get install <package>' will do the trick. In this > sense, building from source is more appropriate in Windows, where you > never know if some random DLL found in the intertubes is OK for your > system and does not contain any unsupported opcodes or hidden viruses. > > However, building from source is essential if you want to know and > control what exactly goes into the final product, and to be able to > resolve any problems related to third-party libraries. With some > libraries (looking at you, libtiff) it is not even possible to > understand how to use the library without seeing the sources. > > If I still had a 32-bit Windows machine now, I'd still be able to run [16-bit] binaries from the 1990s. (64-bit Windows has dropped that support.) One time I tried to transfer a binary from one Linux to another a minute later, and for the same processor, it didn't work. Nobody is really interested in mucking about with source codes is complex directory structures. There are some 50,000 binaries on my OLD Windows PC (it'd be a lot more now); how long would it take to build it all from source code? Last year I wanted to do some things with LLVM, which even in binary is a 1.6GB installation. But it was deliberately missing essential programs like llc.exe, which ARE provided as binaries on Linux. The reaction to that? Oh, just build from sources, as though I'd have any clue of what I was doing! Even if I had, this is a project reportedly took 26 minutes using 14 cores on some high-end machine with SSDs. I wonder how long it would take on my poxy Windows PC with 2 AMD cores and a spinning hard drive? What is the probability of it actually succeeding? It makes no sense at all to expect users to build complex software on their own machines. Not when the build systems are designed to work on Linux and the developers don't care about anything else. Imagine if people wanting to use gcc on Windows had to build that 100,000-file project from sources. (If people wrote small apps like I do it would be a different matter: C:\archive\cx>tm mm cc -run : hello -run Compiling cc.m---------- to cc.exe Compiling hello.c to hello.exe Hello, World! TM: 0.28 'tm' is a timing tool. This times how long it takes for my C compiler to compile and run hello.c, but with an extra twist: it builds the C compiler from scratch first. That adds some 0.2 seconds to the build-time. Unfortunately most software isn't like this.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-04 01:06 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <sgu68v$6s6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #81037 |
03.09.2021 22:45 Bart kirjutas: > On 03/09/2021 20:01, Paavo Helde wrote: >> 03.09.2021 17:35 Bart kirjutas: >>> So why put so much emphasis on building from source? Windows is a >>> highly stable platform, unlike the million varieties of Linux; >>> /that's/ why source is favoured in that case. >> >> In those million varieties of Linux, there is usually no need to build >> from source. There are good chances that either 'zypper install >> <package>' or 'apt-get install <package>' will do the trick. In this >> sense, building from source is more appropriate in Windows, where you >> never know if some random DLL found in the intertubes is OK for your >> system and does not contain any unsupported opcodes or hidden viruses. >> >> However, building from source is essential if you want to know and >> control what exactly goes into the final product, and to be able to >> resolve any problems related to third-party libraries. With some >> libraries (looking at you, libtiff) it is not even possible to >> understand how to use the library without seeing the sources. >> >> > > If I still had a 32-bit Windows machine now, I'd still be able to run > [16-bit] binaries from the 1990s. (64-bit Windows has dropped that > support.) One time I tried to transfer a binary from one Linux to > another a minute later, and for the same processor, it didn't work. Windows is a more or less single platform maintained by a single company; Linux is tens or hundreds of platforms, be it for better or worse. Besides, against your statistical sample of size 1 I have words of my co-worker who claims he has some binary Linux programs from mid-nineties which he still can run (alas, with some creative hackery involved). > > Nobody is really interested in mucking about with source codes is > complex directory structures. There are some 50,000 binaries on my OLD > Windows PC (it'd be a lot more now); how long would it take to build it > all from source code? Well, I am, because I'm paid to do that. Our product involves hundreds of thousands of lines of our own code plus ca 100 third-party libraries. Almost all of those are source-compiled so we can debug and troubleshoot them if needed, both on Linux and Windows. Yes, it might be a hell to get and keep them compiling, and yes, it takes some time to compile them (but only in the first build), and yes, with recent abominations like CUDA we are gradually forced to give up this practice. And of course we are doing all this so that our customers would not need to mess with such things. We are providing precompiled binaries for Windows and Linux, or prebuilt containers, or even pre-configured computers with pre-installed binaries. Come to think of that, I believe I'm not using any program myself which I have compiled from source. All the code which I maintain compiling goes to customers. > Last year I wanted to do some things with LLVM, which even in binary is > a 1.6GB installation. But it was deliberately missing essential programs > like llc.exe, which ARE provided as binaries on Linux. > > The reaction to that? Oh, just build from sources, as though I'd have > any clue of what I was doing! > > Even if I had, this is a project reportedly took 26 minutes using 14 > cores on some high-end machine with SSDs. I wonder how long it would > take on my poxy Windows PC with 2 AMD cores and a spinning hard drive? > What is the probability of it actually succeeding? 26 minutes seems peanuts, to be honest. > It makes no sense at all to expect users to build complex software on > their own machines. Agreed. But somebody, somewhere has to build it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web