On 06/02/2011, at 1:46 AM, Doug Baskins wrote:
> I believe 32 bit machines are a thing of the past because the price
> of memory has dropped to a point that makes 32 bit OS support a nuisance.
On desktops perhaps, but what happens is that 32 bit machines will outnumber
64 bit ones even more, as the price drops they get used in embedded devices
such as cars, etc etc.
I have major software running on *8* bit machines.
Because the chips cost under $5.
As to portability: there are several ways to establish the environment.
The simplest is to used C99: uintptr_t, end of story, so damn bad if
someone has an archaic compiler that doesn't support it.
The next simplest method is to cheat, and define Word_t depending on
a couple of compiler macros: this isn't portable but it is easy to add a new
platform.
The most precise method is trial and error testing BUT it this technique does
not
support cross-compilation.
Everything else can be calculated in a portable way.
For example 64 1 bits is just
~(Word_t)0u
on a 64 bit machine, windows or Linux doesn't matter.
Shift count 64 is given by
CHAR_BIT * sizeof(Word_t)
where CHAR_BIT is always 8 on every modern platform.
Basically Judy shouldn't have much problem being portable,
it is after all just a data structure.
In fact recall my request, I'd really like:
JudyXX32, JudyXX64
I'd actually like to have 32 bit Judy arrays on 64 bit platform because "int"
is 32 bits.
--
john skaller
[email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The modern datacenter depends on network connectivity to access resources
and provide services. The best practices for maximizing a physical server's
connectivity to a physical network are well understood - see how these
rules translate into the virtual world?
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnlfb
_______________________________________________
Judy-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/judy-devel
