On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 21:54:07 -0700 Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> On 8/12/2012 9:44 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > > Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote: > >> Frankly, I think 32 bits is rapidly > >> becoming irrelevant on the desktop. > > > > Bullshit. There will always be plenty of things that don't need > > 64-bits and/or will only incur unnecessary bloat with 64-bit. > > You could say the same about 16 bit code. 16 bit programs are tiny > relative to their 32 bit equivalents. > Even still, it's a far cry to compare ditching 16-bit with (effectively) shunning 32-bit. Yes, 64-bit is bocoming more and more important, and yes, 32-bit is becoming less and less important, but I still think you're very much jumping the gun here.