[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer c
From: |
Miroslaw Dobrzanski-Neumann |
Subject: |
Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:32:01 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i |
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 11:08:32PM -0700, Gopal V wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > low-order bits indicate which arm of the union is
> > being used. Essentially,
>
> So what if the blocks doesn't align to 4 bytes by
> default ?.
>
Fifteen years ago many Amiga programmers (including me) used to store
*usefull* information in the upper byte of the 32bit pointer. The assumption
was clear since the MC68000 cannot physicaly adress more than 16MB the waste
space could be reused. But short time later other Motorola processors with MMU
apeared and a lot of software was broken. My (and not only my) lesson was
*Do not reuse pointer for anything else*
>
> > change. If your platform
> > cannot bit-pack into low-order bits, then it is time
> > to get a new platform. It is that simple.
>
> :)...
What does pnet mean? "portable .net"?
> > to get a new platform. It is that simple.
I do not believe it ist the portable option.
Regards
--
Mirosław Dobrzański-Neumann
E-mail: address@hidden
This message is utf-8 encoded
- [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Peter Colson, 2004/09/22
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Rhys Weatherley, 2004/09/22
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Peter Colson, 2004/09/23
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Rhys Weatherley, 2004/09/23
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Peter Colson, 2004/09/23
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Rhys Weatherley, 2004/09/23
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Peter Colson, 2004/09/23
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Rhys Weatherley, 2004/09/24
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Gopal V, 2004/09/24
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation,
Miroslaw Dobrzanski-Neumann <=
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Rhys Weatherley, 2004/09/24
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Miroslaw Dobrzanski-Neumann, 2004/09/27
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Rhys Weatherley, 2004/09/27
- Re: [Pnet-developers] Use of ILNativeUInt vs. unsigned long in pointer casting and manipulation, Rhys Weatherley, 2004/09/24