On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:57:39 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > "Derek Parnell" <de...@psych.ward> wrote in message > news:nkr1wyvyj3vv$.qr1gd1h779fx....@40tude.net... >> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 15:45:57 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> >>> ... judging by number of people here asking for >>> 64-bit, I find it highly unlikely that most of them have plans to work on >>> such things either. >> >> My interest in 64-bit hardware support is based on the belief that before >> too long, buying a new 32-bit platform might be a difficult thing to do. >> Five years from now, I don't want to be forced into finding a good >> second-hand machine just so I can work with D. >> > > I don't want to be forced into buying a new 64-bit machine just because a > whole bunch of "gotta have the faciest stuff out there" people have deemed > 32-bit insufficient for all computing needs.
And neither do I, but the momentum is far too strong for me to affect, so I assume that it won't be long before I will be forced to get a 64-bit machine - even if I don't want to. > Besides, can't 64-bit machines run 32-bit code? Sure, the same way the 32-bit machines run 16-bit software, and that's not giving anyone troubles ;-) -- Derek Parnell Melbourne, Australia skype: derek.j.parnell
