> > it's considered the linker's job to prevent loading 32-bit > code into a > > 64-bit executable or vice versa, so I don't think we need to be > > checking for common assumptions about sizeof(long). > > I know ELF headers contain some of this info, and unix in > general doesn't try to allow different bit sizes in one > binary. Windows used to (maybe still has) a mechanism to > allow 32-bit code to call 16-bit libraries. Do they allow the > same for 64-bit libs?
Yes, but it's not something that it does automatically - you have to specifically seti t up to call the thunking code. It's not something I think we need to support at all. (Performance is also quite horrible - at least on 16 vs 32, I'd assume the same for 32 vs 64) //Magnus ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
