Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!rex!uflorida!haven!mimsy!mojo!SYSMGR@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 64 bits--why stop there?
Message-ID: <0093B881.2993A3E0@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>
Date: 21 Aug 90 19:17:26 GMT
References: <5539@darkstar.ucsc.edu> <13285@yunexus.YorkU.CA> <30728@super.ORG> <9660@ganymede.inmos.co.uk> <224@csinc.UUCP> <1263.26cdaecc@waikato.ac.nz> <6106@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>,<2437@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Sender: news@eng.umd.edu (The News System)
Reply-To: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Organization: The U. of MD, CP, CAD lab
Lines: 9

In article <2437@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>, davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) writes:
>
>  While we're all talking about 64 bits, where is it writ' that word
>size shall be a power of two bits? Outside of the prevalence of the
>eight bit byte, is there a good technical reason for it? 

A good point here. Won't things change with different technologies down
the pipe (optical). Maybe you'll want to do things in terms of red, blue,
and yellow....I dunno.