Re: [9fans] 64-Bit programming model.

[Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 229 bytes --]

plan 9 code has u32int, u64int etc
which is still rather ugly but easier to speak
without stammering, and is mainly confined to
code that requires particular widths.
the integer type big enough to hold a pointer is uintptr.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4172 bytes --]

From: Karl Magdsick <kmagnum@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] 64-Bit programming model.
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:44:25 -0400
Message-ID: <cd8ecdef0509300844x6e2ae08csbe97ede3b2cff972@mail.gmail.com>

[obligatory plug for C99 types]

u_int8_t, int32_t, u_int32_t, int64_t, u_int64_t, etc.
are for use in code that is dependent upon integer width.

[/obligatory plug for C99 types]


-Karl

On 9/30/05, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote:
> on amd64 it is:
>
> short is 16 bits, as before for Plan 9
> int and long are 32 bits, as before
> long long is 64 bits, also as before
> pointers are 64 bits, not as before.  (it's that last bit causes most of the trouble.)
> i think it must be LLP64 in your scheme
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Vester Thacker <vester.thacker@gmail.com>
> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 04:31:45 -0700
> Subject: [9fans] 64-Bit programming model.
> Okay, time for the "dumb question of the month".
>
> Concerning Plan 9 64-Bit support, which Long Pointer programming model
> is being used with Sparc64 and AMD64 ports? LLP64, LP64 or ILP64. Just
> curious.
>
> Forgive my ignorance, I am a layman and nowadays get my schooling
> though search engine results.
>
> --vester
>
>