From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BE07BB9C for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:49:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jAUInIQU007142 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:49:18 +0100 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA16841 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:49:17 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.davidb.org (adsl-64-172-240-129.dsl.sndg02.pacbell.net [64.172.240.129]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jAUInF30006288 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 19:49:17 +0100 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.davidb.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54 #1 (Debian)) id 1EhX0x-00078N-Lc; Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:49:11 -0800 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Support for 64bit Pentium? From: David Brown To: Alessandro Baretta Cc: Ocaml In-Reply-To: <438DF00B.9030700@barettadeit.com> References: <438DF00B.9030700@barettadeit.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:49:10 -0800 Message-Id: <1133376550.15904.2.camel@shadowdb.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 438DF42E.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 438DF42B.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 baretta:01 variants:01 ocamlopt:01 wrote:01 essentially:01 caml:02 alessandro:03 mainstream:06 tries:06 identical:06 wed:07 dave:09 bit:10 bit:10 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 19:31 +0100, Alessandro Baretta wrote: > Shortly, most mainstream microprocessors will ship in 64 bit variants. I know > that ocamlopt supports AMD64, but what about EM64T, or whatever the new Intel > hype is called? They are identical, at least from a user-program perspective. Intel tries very hard to downplay this, since they've essentially reversed positions, and have themselves cloned AMD's features. Dave Brown