Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!ziggy!screamer!tscs!tct!chip From: chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: What *should* architectural pointers point at? Message-ID: <26DE7EE3.58FC@tct.uucp> Date: 31 Aug 90 15:14:42 GMT References: <0887@sheol.UUCP> <2491@l.cc.purdue.edu> Organization: Teltronics/TCT, Sarasota, FL Lines: 18 According to cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin): >We are discussing machines where the memory is sufficiently large that >32-bit addressing is inadequate. Not quite. We are discussing machines where the *address space* is too large for 32 bits. For widely-used machines, physical memory will usually be less than four gigabytes, and thus 32-bit addressable. >Four bits is 1/16 of an address. I would not so blithely throw away 15/16 of my address space. >Again, we are discussing 64-bit address machines. "Wasting" even 8 bits >in addressing is only 1/8 of the length of an address. I most certainly would not throw away 255/256 of my address space. -- Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT ,