Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!asuvax!ukma!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!sei.cmu.edu!firth From: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Segmented Architectures ( formerly Re: 48-bit computers) Message-ID: <23660@as0c.sei.cmu.edu> Date: 4 Apr 91 22:21:17 GMT References: <1991Apr04.023845.3501@kithrup.COM> <23615@as0c.sei.cmu.edu> <1991Apr04.202446.13595@kithrup.COM> Reply-To: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) Organization: Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 20 In article <1991Apr04.202446.13595@kithrup.COM> sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: [ DIMENSION BIGMAT(50000,50000) [ DOUBLE PRECISION BIGMAT >Gee, this works on current 32-bit machines? No. But you claimed to have a machine with 32-bit integer and 48-bit addressing, and challenged us to produce code that ought to work on such a machine but won't on yours. The above was my response. > And if it bothers you that much, fine: >for the FORTRAN compiler, it, also, will use just one segment tag, just like >the intial C port I hypothesized about. There, now you've only got 4Gb of >virtual memory for any fortran program. Happy? Yes, for you have just conceded my point: the code ought to work; it won't work on your machine because your addressing scheme forbids it; you are not competent to solve the problem in the compiler; so you've given up and thrown the mess you designed back in the user's lap. Pathetic.