Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #162505 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-08-30 21:59 -0500 |
| Last post | 2021-09-01 14:30 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 78 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
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*) ? 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*) ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-01 14:04 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 23:44 +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...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-01 12:43 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 05:37 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-02 11:28 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-03 07:10 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-03 06:59 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-03 17:02 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-09-03 19:33 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-03 19:47 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-03 17:54 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-03 20:54 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-03 20:52 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-04 12:36 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-03 10:49 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-03 19:10 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-03 14:20 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-09-03 19:45 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-03 16:35 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-04 13:12 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-04 09:11 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-04 11:27 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-05 04:25 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-06 16:10 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-08 19:44 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-08 11:45 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-09 19:09 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-09 10:51 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-10 10:31 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-10 10:41 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-09-14 04:14 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-14 07:45 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-01 20:34 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-01 13:02 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-01 20:18 +0000
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-01 14:07 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-01 22:18 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-01 18:23 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-02 13:35 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 05:24 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2021-09-02 14:56 -0600
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-09-07 21:12 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-09-07 22:19 -0400
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2021-09-12 21:23 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-09 08:36 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 17:46 -0500
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 16:53 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 17:11 -0500
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-09-01 16:59 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 17:01 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-02 01:29 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-02 13:29 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-02 14:19 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 17:10 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-02 07:28 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-02 21:07 +0200
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2021-09-02 13:05 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-02 17:18 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-03 01:25 +0100
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 03:30 -0700
Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 03:36 -0700
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*) ? Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-09-01 14:30 -0700
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-30 21:59 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Examples of current platforms/architectures where sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? |
| Message-ID | <sgk5v9$aik$1@dont-email.me> |
On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where > sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? > > - Alf Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? Lynn
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-30 21:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <sgkckd$6cg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162505 |
On 8/30/2021 7:59 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: > On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >> >> - Alf > > Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? > > Lynn > Quoted from SO https://stackoverflow.com/questions/24867814/printfp-and-casting-to-void/24867850#24867850 === An example of an implementation with different pointer types representation is Cray PVP where the representation of pointer types is 64-bit for `void *` and `char *` but 32-bit for the other pointer types. See "Cray C/C++ Reference Manual", Table 3. in "9.1.2.2" http://docs.cray.com/books/004-2179-003/004-2179-003-manual.pdf === -- Best regards, Andrey Tarasevich
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-30 21:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <sgkcuq$7gd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162506 |
On 8/30/2021 9:53 PM, Andrey Tarasevich wrote: > On 8/30/2021 7:59 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote: >> On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >>> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >>> >>> - Alf >> >> Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? >> >> Lynn >> > > Quoted from SO > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/24867814/printfp-and-casting-to-void/24867850#24867850 > > > === > An example of an implementation with different pointer types > representation is Cray PVP where the representation of pointer types is > 64-bit for `void *` and `char *` but 32-bit for the other pointer types. > > See "Cray C/C++ Reference Manual", Table 3. in "9.1.2.2" > http://docs.cray.com/books/004-2179-003/004-2179-003-manual.pdf > === > The link to the Reference Manual is broken, but the same manual is currently available from here https://manualzz.com/doc/13740819/cray-c-c---reference-manual-004–2179–003 Also, 32 bits were apparently used in value representation of those "other pointer types", while the object representation was still the same 64 bits, implying 32 padding bits. -- Best regards, Andrey Tarasevich
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-31 09:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ip62ekFsc6mU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #162505 |
On 2021-08-31 at 04:59, Lynn McGuire wrote: > On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >> >> - Alf > > Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? > > Lynn > It would have been word-addressed machines, where char* (and thus void*) needed a part-word indicator in addition to the word address. Haven't seen any of those lately.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-31 23:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sgn0j7$999$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162509 |
On 8/31/2021 2:01 AM, Bo Persson wrote: > On 2021-08-31 at 04:59, Lynn McGuire wrote: >> On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >>> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >>> >>> - Alf >> >> Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? >> >> Lynn >> > > It would have been word-addressed machines, where char* (and thus void*) > needed a part-word indicator in addition to the word address. > > Haven't seen any of those lately. Yeah, can't think of a reason why to build anything other than a byte addressable machine. I don't even see expansion of the byte from 8 bits to 16 bits. Lynn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 08:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgn62f$5b8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162526 |
On 01/09/2021 06:46, Lynn McGuire wrote: > On 8/31/2021 2:01 AM, Bo Persson wrote: >> On 2021-08-31 at 04:59, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>> On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>>> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >>>> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >>>> >>>> - Alf >>> >>> Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? >>> >>> Lynn >>> >> >> It would have been word-addressed machines, where char* (and thus >> void*) needed a part-word indicator in addition to the word address. >> >> Haven't seen any of those lately. > > Yeah, can't think of a reason why to build anything other than a byte > addressable machine. I don't even see expansion of the byte from 8 bits > to 16 bits. By the definition of "byte", all C and C++ targets are byte addressable. > > Lynn > There are plenty of them - they are all around you, but you don't notice them. DSP's are often word addressable, where "word" can be anything from 12 to perhaps 36 bits, with a range of values in between. And there are very good reasons for not making them 8-bit byte addressable. But it is relatively rare that there are C++ compilers for these systems, and they have larger CHAR_BIT rather than having different sized pointers for char* and int*.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 15:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u2NXI.17687$F26.16281@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #162526 |
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >On 8/31/2021 2:01 AM, Bo Persson wrote: >> On 2021-08-31 at 04:59, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>> On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>>> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >>>> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >>>> >>>> - Alf >>> >>> Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? >>> >>> Lynn >>> >> >> It would have been word-addressed machines, where char* (and thus void*) >> needed a part-word indicator in addition to the word address. >> >> Haven't seen any of those lately. > >Yeah, can't think of a reason why to build anything other than a byte >addressable machine. Strong words from a fortran programmer. How many CPUs have you designed in the last forty years? As David points out, many DSPs are not byte addressable, and there are other machines _STILL IN DAILY PRODUCTION_ that don't have byte addressability, yet support C compilers (e.g. both flavors of Unisys Clearpath). A modern DPU: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16790/marvell-announces-octeon-10-dpu-family-first-to-5nm-with-n2-cpus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 19:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgocps$nqd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162537 |
Am 01.09.2021 um 17:32 schrieb Scott Lurndal: > Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >> On 8/31/2021 2:01 AM, Bo Persson wrote: >>> On 2021-08-31 at 04:59, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>> On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>>>> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >>>>> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >>>>> >>>>> - Alf >>>> >>>> Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? >>>> >>>> Lynn >>>> >>> >>> It would have been word-addressed machines, where char* (and thus void*) >>> needed a part-word indicator in addition to the word address. >>> >>> Haven't seen any of those lately. >> >> Yeah, can't think of a reason why to build anything other than a byte >> addressable machine. > > Strong words from a fortran programmer. How many CPUs have you > designed in the last forty years? > > As David points out, many DSPs are not byte addressable, and there > are other machines _STILL IN DAILY PRODUCTION_ that don't have > byte addressability, yet support C compilers (e.g. both flavors > of Unisys Clearpath). These are not "many" but according to the examples given yet a homeopathic part.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 19:44 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgoe5r$2rv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162538 |
On 01/09/2021 19:20, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 01.09.2021 um 17:32 schrieb Scott Lurndal: >> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >>> On 8/31/2021 2:01 AM, Bo Persson wrote: >>>> On 2021-08-31 at 04:59, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>> On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>>>>> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >>>>>> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >>>>>> >>>>>> - Alf >>>>> >>>>> Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? >>>>> >>>>> Lynn >>>>> >>>> >>>> It would have been word-addressed machines, where char* (and thus >>>> void*) >>>> needed a part-word indicator in addition to the word address. >>>> >>>> Haven't seen any of those lately. >>> >>> Yeah, can't think of a reason why to build anything other than a byte >>> addressable machine. >> >> Strong words from a fortran programmer. How many CPUs have you >> designed in the last forty years? >> >> As David points out, many DSPs are not byte addressable, and there >> are other machines _STILL IN DAILY PRODUCTION_ that don't have >> byte addressability, yet support C compilers (e.g. both flavors >> of Unisys Clearpath). > > These are not "many" but according to the examples given yet > a homeopathic part. > I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. I don't know what you mean by "not many". In terms of numbers of units, 8-bit devices and "hidden" microcontrollers and DSPs outsell 32-bit devices by orders of magnitude - and 32-bit devices similarly outsell PC processors. In terms of numbers of designs or chips available, it's the same story. PC processors lead in terms of total cost, and lead hugely in terms of the number of different people programming on them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 13:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sgog3c$h1t$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162539 |
On 9/1/2021 12:44 PM, David Brown wrote: > On 01/09/2021 19:20, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Am 01.09.2021 um 17:32 schrieb Scott Lurndal: >>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >>>> On 8/31/2021 2:01 AM, Bo Persson wrote: >>>>> On 2021-08-31 at 04:59, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>> On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>>>>>> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >>>>>>> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Alf >>>>>> >>>>>> Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Lynn >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It would have been word-addressed machines, where char* (and thus >>>>> void*) >>>>> needed a part-word indicator in addition to the word address. >>>>> >>>>> Haven't seen any of those lately. >>>> >>>> Yeah, can't think of a reason why to build anything other than a byte >>>> addressable machine. >>> >>> Strong words from a fortran programmer. How many CPUs have you >>> designed in the last forty years? >>> >>> As David points out, many DSPs are not byte addressable, and there >>> are other machines _STILL IN DAILY PRODUCTION_ that don't have >>> byte addressability, yet support C compilers (e.g. both flavors >>> of Unisys Clearpath). >> >> These are not "many" but according to the examples given yet >> a homeopathic part. >> > > I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit > cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than > 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year > (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other > specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. > I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with > 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. > > I don't know what you mean by "not many". In terms of numbers of units, > 8-bit devices and "hidden" microcontrollers and DSPs outsell 32-bit > devices by orders of magnitude - and 32-bit devices similarly outsell PC > processors. In terms of numbers of designs or chips available, it's the > same story. PC processors lead in terms of total cost, and lead hugely > in terms of the number of different people programming on them. Your numbers for AMD and Intel are WAY off. There were 275 million PCs sold in 2020 containing Intel or AMD cpus. https://www.statista.com/statistics/273495/global-shipments-of-personal-computers-since-2006/ Lynn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 20:32 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgogv4$l7e$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162541 |
On 01/09/2021 20:17, Lynn McGuire wrote: > On 9/1/2021 12:44 PM, David Brown wrote: >> On 01/09/2021 19:20, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> Am 01.09.2021 um 17:32 schrieb Scott Lurndal: >>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >>>>> On 8/31/2021 2:01 AM, Bo Persson wrote: >>>>>> On 2021-08-31 at 04:59, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>> On 8/29/2021 1:57 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>>>>>>> Are there any examples of current platforms/architectures where >>>>>>>> sizeof(void*) > sizeof(int*) ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Alf >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are there any old platforms where this was the case also ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Lynn >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It would have been word-addressed machines, where char* (and thus >>>>>> void*) >>>>>> needed a part-word indicator in addition to the word address. >>>>>> >>>>>> Haven't seen any of those lately. >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, can't think of a reason why to build anything other than a byte >>>>> addressable machine. >>>> >>>> Strong words from a fortran programmer. How many CPUs have you >>>> designed in the last forty years? >>>> >>>> As David points out, many DSPs are not byte addressable, and there >>>> are other machines _STILL IN DAILY PRODUCTION_ that don't have >>>> byte addressability, yet support C compilers (e.g. both flavors >>>> of Unisys Clearpath). >>> >>> These are not "many" but according to the examples given yet >>> a homeopathic part. >>> >> >> I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit >> cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than >> 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year >> (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other >> specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. >> I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with >> 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. >> >> I don't know what you mean by "not many". In terms of numbers of units, >> 8-bit devices and "hidden" microcontrollers and DSPs outsell 32-bit >> devices by orders of magnitude - and 32-bit devices similarly outsell PC >> processors. In terms of numbers of designs or chips available, it's the >> same story. PC processors lead in terms of total cost, and lead hugely >> in terms of the number of different people programming on them. > > Your numbers for AMD and Intel are WAY off. There were 275 million PCs > sold in 2020 containing Intel or AMD cpus. > > https://www.statista.com/statistics/273495/global-shipments-of-personal-computers-since-2006/ > They did look odd when I read them - perhaps the statistics page I found was referring to a limited type of chip. Anyway, small devices still massively outsell them in numbers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 19:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <l5QXI.8718$6U3.8612@fx43.iad> |
| In reply to | #162541 |
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >On 9/1/2021 12:44 PM, David Brown wrote: >> I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit >> cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than >> 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year >> (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other >> specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. >> I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with >> 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. >> >> I don't know what you mean by "not many". In terms of numbers of units, >> 8-bit devices and "hidden" microcontrollers and DSPs outsell 32-bit >> devices by orders of magnitude - and 32-bit devices similarly outsell PC >> processors. In terms of numbers of designs or chips available, it's the >> same story. PC processors lead in terms of total cost, and lead hugely >> in terms of the number of different people programming on them. > >Your numbers for AMD and Intel are WAY off. There were 275 million PCs >sold in 2020 containing Intel or AMD cpus. 300 million X86 (intel, amd) processors per year, including servers. 6 billion arm processors per _quarter_. 1.5 billion ARC processors per year. 400 million MIPS processors per year.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 15:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sgomg0$tuq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162544 |
On 9/1/2021 2:00 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >> On 9/1/2021 12:44 PM, David Brown wrote: > >>> I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit >>> cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than >>> 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year >>> (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other >>> specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. >>> I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with >>> 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. >>> >>> I don't know what you mean by "not many". In terms of numbers of units, >>> 8-bit devices and "hidden" microcontrollers and DSPs outsell 32-bit >>> devices by orders of magnitude - and 32-bit devices similarly outsell PC >>> processors. In terms of numbers of designs or chips available, it's the >>> same story. PC processors lead in terms of total cost, and lead hugely >>> in terms of the number of different people programming on them. >> >> Your numbers for AMD and Intel are WAY off. There were 275 million PCs >> sold in 2020 containing Intel or AMD cpus. > > 300 million X86 (intel, amd) processors per year, including servers. > 6 billion arm processors per _quarter_. > 1.5 billion ARC processors per year. > 400 million MIPS processors per year. Yup, not surprised. What is your source ? Lynn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 20:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <_aRXI.35211$jl2.30937@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #162550 |
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >On 9/1/2021 2:00 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes: >>> On 9/1/2021 12:44 PM, David Brown wrote: >> >>>> I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit >>>> cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than >>>> 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year >>>> (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other >>>> specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. >>>> I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with >>>> 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. >>>> >>>> I don't know what you mean by "not many". In terms of numbers of units, >>>> 8-bit devices and "hidden" microcontrollers and DSPs outsell 32-bit >>>> devices by orders of magnitude - and 32-bit devices similarly outsell PC >>>> processors. In terms of numbers of designs or chips available, it's the >>>> same story. PC processors lead in terms of total cost, and lead hugely >>>> in terms of the number of different people programming on them. >>> >>> Your numbers for AMD and Intel are WAY off. There were 275 million PCs >>> sold in 2020 containing Intel or AMD cpus. >> >> 300 million X86 (intel, amd) processors per year, including servers. >> 6 billion arm processors per _quarter_. >> 1.5 billion ARC processors per year. >> 400 million MIPS processors per year. > >Yup, not surprised. What is your source ? Industry analyst documents that I'm not free to share. But if you look at Toms Hardware you may find similar numbers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 14:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f55e6b43-9fda-4790-85dd-93244de0d3ddn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #162551 |
On Wednesday, September 1, 2021 at 11:15:02 PM UTC+3, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Lynn McGuire <lynnmc...@gmail.com> writes: > >On 9/1/2021 2:00 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > >> Lynn McGuire <lynnmc...@gmail.com> writes: > >>> On 9/1/2021 12:44 PM, David Brown wrote: > >> > >>>> I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit > >>>> cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than > >>>> 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year > >>>> (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other > >>>> specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. > >>>> I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with > >>>> 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. > >>>> > >>>> I don't know what you mean by "not many". In terms of numbers of units, > >>>> 8-bit devices and "hidden" microcontrollers and DSPs outsell 32-bit > >>>> devices by orders of magnitude - and 32-bit devices similarly outsell PC > >>>> processors. In terms of numbers of designs or chips available, it's the > >>>> same story. PC processors lead in terms of total cost, and lead hugely > >>>> in terms of the number of different people programming on them. > >>> > >>> Your numbers for AMD and Intel are WAY off. There were 275 million PCs > >>> sold in 2020 containing Intel or AMD cpus. > >> > >> 300 million X86 (intel, amd) processors per year, including servers. > >> 6 billion arm processors per _quarter_. > >> 1.5 billion ARC processors per year. > >> 400 million MIPS processors per year. > > > >Yup, not surprised. What is your source ? > Industry analyst documents that I'm not free to share. > > But if you look at Toms Hardware you may find similar numbers. Somehow I don't think the MIPS figure is up to date. Right now MIPS is in *very* bad financial shape and changing owners approximately 5 times per decade. Also, it does not look like your Intel figures include network storage appliances and that your AMD figures include gaming consoles. Each of them is likely close to 20M per year.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 23:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <8fUXI.32068$lC6.4731@fx41.iad> |
| In reply to | #162553 |
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: >On Wednesday, September 1, 2021 at 11:15:02 PM UTC+3, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> Lynn McGuire <lynnmc...@gmail.com> writes: >> >> 300 million X86 (intel, amd) processors per year, including servers. >> >> 6 billion arm processors per _quarter_. >> >> 1.5 billion ARC processors per year. >> >> 400 million MIPS processors per year. >> > >> >Yup, not surprised. What is your source ? >> Industry analyst documents that I'm not free to share. >> >> But if you look at Toms Hardware you may find similar numbers. > >Somehow I don't think the MIPS figure is up to date. >Right now MIPS is in *very* bad financial shape and changing owners approximately 5 times per decade. > >Also, it does not look like your Intel figures include network storage appliances and that your AMD figures include gaming consoles. >Each of them is likely close to 20M per year. > MIPS designs from a decade back still sell in the millions every year. They work, they work well and they solve the problems they're intended to solve. Regardless, 24 billion ARM processors yearly dwarfs the rest.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 20:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgoh8e$ntj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162539 |
Am 01.09.2021 um 19:44 schrieb David Brown: > I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit > cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than > 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year > (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other > specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. > I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with > 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. The issue is not about whether they're can't address raw bytes but just larger quantities. The issue is about machines with typed pointers, i.e. when you cast a pointer they change their bit-representation, and these exist in a homeopathic amount.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-01 12:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <660d702c-53f9-4c4f-b746-7045c0dc8b7bn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #162543 |
On Wednesday, September 1, 2021 at 2:37:13 PM UTC-4, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 01.09.2021 um 19:44 schrieb David Brown: > > > I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit > > cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than > > 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year > > (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other > > specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. > > I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with > > 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. > The issue is not about whether they're can't address raw bytes but just > larger quantities. The issue is about machines with typed pointers, i.e. > when you cast a pointer they change their bit-representation, and these > exist in a homeopathic amount. Keep in mind that not being able to address bytes is the single most common reason for having two or more different sizes of pointers. Still, it would have been more on topic if had been able to directly confirm that the platforms he was referring to had implementations that used two or more pointer representations. Describing these as "typed pointers" makes it sound as if the pointers contain information about the type that they represent. That's no the case being described. They typically have two, and only two, representations: the large version consists of a word address and an explicit byte offset from the start of the specified word, while the short form contains only the word address, with an offset of 0 being implicit when such pointers are used.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-02 05:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sgpgtm$ft7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #162546 |
Am 01.09.2021 um 21:43 schrieb james...@alumni.caltech.edu: > On Wednesday, September 1, 2021 at 2:37:13 PM UTC-4, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Am 01.09.2021 um 19:44 schrieb David Brown: >> >>> I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit >>> cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than >>> 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year >>> (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other >>> specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. >>> I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with >>> 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. >> The issue is not about whether they're can't address raw bytes but just >> larger quantities. The issue is about machines with typed pointers, i.e. >> when you cast a pointer they change their bit-representation, and these >> exist in a homeopathic amount. > > Keep in mind that not being able to address bytes is the single most > common reason for having two or more different sizes of pointers. No, on the platforms where you don't have byte-pointers you almost never have typed pointers. Rest unread.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-09-02 11:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1b0fddb0-ead0-46b7-acd6-fcd629cea2b3n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #162568 |
On Wednesday, September 1, 2021 at 11:37:37 PM UTC-4, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 01.09.2021 um 21:43 schrieb james...@alumni.caltech.edu: > > On Wednesday, September 1, 2021 at 2:37:13 PM UTC-4, Bonita Montero wrote: > >> Am 01.09.2021 um 19:44 schrieb David Brown: > >> > >>> I believe there are more dedicated DSP's produced per year than 64-bit > >>> cpus. There may even be more 4-bit microcontrollers still produced than > >>> 64-bit cpus. AMD and Intel each sell perhaps 500,000 processors a year > >>> (according to a quick google search). There are DSPs and other > >>> specialist microcontrollers with minimum order quantities of millions. > >>> I know of microcontrollers (programmable in C, and in this case with > >>> 8-bit char) that cost $0.03 each. > >> The issue is not about whether they're can't address raw bytes but just > >> larger quantities. The issue is about machines with typed pointers, i.e. > >> when you cast a pointer they change their bit-representation, and these > >> exist in a homeopathic amount. > > > > Keep in mind that not being able to address bytes is the single most > > common reason for having two or more different sizes of pointers. > No, on the platforms where you don't have byte-pointers you almost never > have typed pointers. The platform doesn't have pointers - that's a C concept. The platform has word addresses. On the platforms I'm referring to, implementations of C do have byte pointers. Those byte pointers must contain both the word address, and the byte offset within the word, which is why they are bigger than pointers to word-aligned types. I don't understand your insistence on using "typed pointer" to describe these. As the term is conventionally interpreted, all C pointers are always typed. See <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointer_(computer_programming)#Typed_pointers_and_casting> What the C standard fails to mandate about the representation of pointers allows pointers with different types to have different representations, which is what allows the existence of implementations where void* and int* have different sizes, but all C pointers are typed even on implementations where all pointers have exactly the same representation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web