64 bit cleanup completion?

tim Rowledge tim at rowledge.org
Sat Apr 22 05:24:58 UTC 2006

On 21-Apr-06, at 8:39 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote:

> David,
>> p.s. I think this power of two business is a bit over-hyped. The
>> correct machine word size is and always has been 24 bits.
> 24?  24???!!!  What kind of number is that?!?  You can't even fit  
> an entire file name into it (sixbit uppercase ASCII, naturally)!
> Noooo....  You need 36 bits, my man.  Split down the middle for  
> those ordinary everyday tasks where 18 bit halfwords will do just  
> fine, and in only half the resources too.

Fie on that nonsense. What y'need is 33bits. 32 for a decent size  
integer (who*needs* 64 bit values, anyway) and one bit for a tag.  
Then you  need an asynchronous ARM-like architecture with the TLC  
(sorta WCS) and floating pint hardware connected to fullspeed mram so  
that there is no need for data cache. Then you have a few thousand of  
those in a single machine. Easy. Now gimme One Billion Euros to  
implement it.

tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
State-of-the-art: What we could do with enough money.

More information about the Vm-dev mailing list