Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!linus!philabs!micomvax!musocs!mcgill-vision!mouse
From: mouse@mcgill-vision.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Intel && C (was: Passing (char *) NULL)
Message-ID: <882@mcgill-vision.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Sep-87 05:03:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: mcgill-v.882
Posted: Mon Sep  7 05:03:59 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Sep-87 05:40:38 EDT
References: <166@qetzal.UUCP> <157@hobbes.UUCP> <875@bsu-cs.UUCP> <14106@topaz.rutgers.edu>
Organization: McGill University, Montreal
Lines: 27
Keywords: MSC,NULL segments

>>> [H]as anyone else noticed how C is being warped, [...] because ONE
>>> microprocessor manufacturer [Intel] couldn't see fit to provide a
>>> flat, linear address space?
>> This argument boils down to "If 'C' was good enough for a PDP-11, it
>> should be good enough for any machine!"
> PDP-11's can't provide a flat linear address space either.  You are
> limited to 64K text and data (or 64K each if you have split I/D).
> Note that this is exactly the same as small model on the 80x86.  The
> best we ever managed in a coherent fashion was text overlays (medium
> model).

So, Ron, what *is* a "flat linear address space"?  As far as I can see,
a PDP-11 provides a lovely flat linear address space, it's just that
it's restricted to 64k.  Even the Intel chip we all love to hate
provides such an address space: it's called a "segment" and is, like
most machine's address spaces, limited in size.

All current machines, as far as I know at least, restrict the size of
the address space (some of them have a smaller limit than others, of
course).  Does this mean there are no machines out there with this
magical "flat linear address space" you are talking about?  Or is it
only that machines whose address space is small enough to chafe don't
get this title?

					der Mouse

				(mouse@mcgill-vision.uucp)