> Hrm. Confusing. I would have thought that the JIT compilers would be
platform specific,
> but the .net assemblies put out by say, csc.exe, would not be.
> So there'd be a 32-bit version of the 1.1 framework
> (which would include just a 32-bit JIT compiler, and any ngen'ed type code
w
54 PM
To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] 64bit Windows XP vs 32 bit
>From what I understand, there are two JIT'ers in 2.0, one for 64bit and one
for 32 bit. IN 1.x, there was never a 64 JIT'er created, and I suspect
never will be. Good thing in
>> In 1.x he's right, in 2.0 you should be able to use the large memory.
> Or give a reference? I'm curious why 1.x isn't able to use the large
> memory...
search (Microsoft, MSDN, Google) for 'anycpu',
the default for the new 'platform' compiler switch in .NET 2.0:
http://msdn2.microsof
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 11:54 PM
To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] 64bit Windows XP vs 32 bit
>From what I understand, there are two JIT'ers in 2.0, one for 64bit and one
for 32 bit. IN 1.x, there was never a 64 JIT'er created, and I
hawn
Wildermuth
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 1:54 PM
To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] 64bit Windows XP vs 32 bit
>From what I understand, there are two JIT'ers in 2.0, one for 64bit and
one for 32 bit. IN 1.x, there was never a 64 JIT'er created, a
eptember 06, 2005 4:45 PM
->To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
->Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] 64bit Windows XP vs 32 bit
->
->Can you say some more about this Shawn? Or give a reference?
-> I'm curious why 1.x isn't able to use the large memory...
->
->Thanks!
->[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Marlow
>> ->Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 4:35 PM
>> ->To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
>> ->Subject: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] 64bit Windows XP vs 32 bit
>> ->
>> ->Hi Gurus,
>> ->
Mark,
You want to check with who made the library and see if it is compiled with the
2.0 compiler. Most likely not, since Microsoft is not releasing the 2.0 .net
framework until November 11'th.
Jeff
>> Hi Gurus,
>> I am using a 3rd party class library developed / based on the .net
t: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 1:38 PM
To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] 64bit Windows XP vs 32 bit
In 1.x he's right, in 2.0 you should be able to use the large memory.
It's JIT'd to 64bit code, but not sure whether AMD vs. Intel 64bit would
make a di
>From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
->[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Marlow
->Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 4:35 PM
->To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
->Subject: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] 64bit Windows XP vs 32 bit
->
->Hi Gurus,
->
->I
Hi Gurus,
I am using a 3rd party class library developed / based on the .net runtime.
Would it automagically utilize large memory model? The vendor tech support
dude claims it would run under "32 bit compatability mode" and thus be
limited to 4GB of memory. This seems odd as one of the promises
11 matches
Mail list logo
