Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!physics.oxford.ac.uk!HALLAM
From: HALLAM@physics.oxford.ac.uk ("Phillip M. Hallam-Baker")
Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer
Subject: RE origami ....
Message-ID: <10861.9103141412@prg.oxford.ac.uk>
Date: 14 Mar 91 14:13:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 17


Dear net,

	This only obliquely concerns parallelism but all this hassle
because people did not cast their mallocs properly reminds me of
an article in parallelogram where a company was crowing over it's 64
bit database they had written for CRAY. They claimed that a lot of 
their competition could not do so because their programmers had 
used integers to hold pointers which is a limited value trick once your
pointers get too big... just goes to show that moaning type checkers
can be a real advantage!

	Phill Hallam-Baker

PS just a thought... if that was the hole the were in why not just
	fudge the compiler to make all integers 64 bit ??? Still 
	makes good advertising copy.