Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c++:13165 comp.lang.c:38885
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!news.cs.indiana.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!phil
From: phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN)
Subject: Re: 64 bit architectures and C/C++
Message-ID: <1991May1.012242.26211@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
References: <168@shasta.Stanford.EDU> <1991Apr29.211937.10865@sco.COM>
Date: Wed, 1 May 1991 01:22:42 GMT
Lines: 22

john@sco.COM (John R. MacMillan) writes:

>One problem with 32 bit ints and 64 bit pointers is that a lot of
>(bad) code assumes you can put a pointer into an int, and vice versa.

>...there is a lot of badly written code out there, and no matter what
>you do, you'll break somebody's bogus assumptions.  In particular a
>lot of code makes assumptions about pointer sizes, whether they'll fit
>in ints, and whether you can treat them like ints.

For how long should we keep porting code, especially BAD CODE?  This sounds
a lot like school systems that keep moving failing students up each year
and we know what that results in.

IMHO, no code older than 8 years should be permitted to be ported and if
it is found to be "bad" code then it must have been written more than 8
years ago.
-- 
 /***************************************************************************\
/ Phil Howard -- KA9WGN -- phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu   |  Guns don't aim guns at  \
\ Lietuva laisva -- Brivu Latviju -- Eesti vabaks  |  people; CRIMINALS do!!  /
 \***************************************************************************/