Newsgroups: comp.arch
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: 64 bits--why stop there?
Message-ID: <1990Aug30.165552.3875@zoo.toronto.edu>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <6106@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <2437@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> <631@array.UUCP> <225@csinc.UUCP> <1372@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> <141569@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 16:55:52 GMT

In article <141569@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> lm@sun.UUCP (Larry McVoy) writes:
>(1)  Unix has reached the age where it has what can be called dusty deck code.
>     And this code frequently does stuff like
>
>	 char *bar = (char*)malloc(100);
>    
>    which doesn't work under Rob's machine...

Uh, why not?  C definitely requires that sizes be expressed in bytes; you
cannot fool with that without breaking great masses of code.  That doesn't
meant that addressing can't be to the bit.
-- 
TCP/IP: handling tomorrow's loads today| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
OSI: handling yesterday's loads someday|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry