Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #4784
| From | "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming |
| Subject | Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess |
| Date | 2014-09-15 19:32 -0400 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <lv7sti$5mi$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <m9su0868osqi.od5en2j049hq$.dlg@40tude.net> <lv4qee$nra$1@speranza.aioe.org> <1szke6pe4wjgd$.wpsri6v7srjm.dlg@40tude.net> <lv7arg$peo$1@speranza.aioe.org> <1jts5lcbc7f2b$.vjtpcuejd0af.dlg@40tude.net> |
"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message
news:1jts5lcbc7f2b$.vjtpcuejd0af.dlg@40tude.net...
> Low level ability deficiencies, yes. C is pretty poor at the low level, if
> by that you mean closeness to the hardware. It was designed for PDP
> machines which were much different from modern CPUs, e.g. they had
> everything addressable, even registers were. Basically C fails at every
> level.
PDPs I believe were middle endianess. I don't know of any machines now
that are that type of achitecture. But the bitwise ops, that's pretty unique
IMO.
Bill
Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-09-13 21:41 -0400
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2014-09-14 09:14 +0200
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-09-14 15:31 -0400
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2014-09-14 21:38 +0200
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-09-14 22:05 +0100
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2014-09-15 09:40 +0200
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-09-15 11:51 +0100
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2014-09-15 13:49 +0100
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2014-09-15 17:16 +0200
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-09-15 22:23 +0100
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2014-09-16 10:44 +0200
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-09-16 00:18 +0000
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2014-09-15 06:18 -0500
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-09-15 14:23 -0400
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2014-09-15 21:08 +0200
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-09-15 19:32 -0400
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2014-09-15 21:07 +0100
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-09-15 21:48 -0400
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess Jongware <jongware@no-spam.plz> - 2014-09-15 10:57 +0200
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2014-09-15 14:06 +0100
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-09-15 21:50 -0400
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2014-09-17 09:54 +0100
Re: gcc-4.x.x and endianess "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-09-17 22:29 -0400
csiph-web