Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!qucdn!leek Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: 64 bits, but for what? Organization: Queen's University at Kingston Date: Monday, 13 Aug 1990 08:06:54 EDT From: Message-ID: <90225.080654LEEK@QUCDN.BITNET> Distribution: na References: <1990Aug11.203944.10478@nlm.nih.gov> <1990Aug13.065744.13208@Neon.Stanford.EDU> In article <1990Aug13.065744.13208@Neon.Stanford.EDU>, andy@Theory.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) says: > >64 bit addresses, registers (and "natural" sizes for ints and floats) >are one thing, but should the instructions grow to 64 bits at the same >time? How about the program counter? (How fast are programs growing >and how big are they now?) > Yes ! Make everything the same size. It makes life a lot easier to operate on the 64-bit registers. Yes ! 64-bit PC. By now everyone should have learnt the mistake that Intel made moving from 8080 to 8086/8088. >-andy >-- >UUCP: {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!neon.stanford.edu!andy >ARPA: andy@neon.stanford.edu >BELLNET: (415) 723-3088 K. C. Lee "Make everything big enough to count all the atoms in this Universe." -me (Now if we store a few bits bits per atom...)