<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>Perhaps the vanilla x86_64 beam should be called doubleword beam. And no halfword.</div><div><br></div><div> It always struck me as strange that erlangs wordsize was dependent on what machine it was running on.</div>
<div><br>// Björn-Egil<br>Skickat från min iPhone</div><div><br>31 maj 2011 kl. 07:10 skrev OvermindDL1 <<a href="mailto:overminddl1@gmail.com">overminddl1@gmail.com</a>>:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite">
<div><p><br>
On May 30, 2011 9:47 PM, "Jeff Schultz" <<a href="mailto:jws@csse.unimelb.edu.au"><a href="mailto:jws@csse.unimelb.edu.au">jws@csse.unimelb.edu.au</a></a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 03:38:57PM +1200, Richard O'Keefe wrote:<br>
> > On 31/05/2011, at 8:20 AM, Paolo Negri wrote:<br>
> > > I would like to assess the state of development and recommended usage<br>
> > > of the halfword emulator.<br>
><br>
> > Could I just make the point that "halfword" is confusing?<br>
> > I thought it referred to 16-bit units of something.<br>
> > It might be clearer if called the "small pointer emulator"<br>
> > or something like that.<br>
><br>
> Or "compact pointer emulator" or "compact address emulator."<br>
><br>
><br>
> Jeff Schultz</p>
<p>Was it not only for 64bit, hence a halfword will only be 32bit, not 16bit?<br>
</p>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>erlang-questions mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:erlang-questions@erlang.org">erlang-questions@erlang.org</a></span><br>
<span><a href="http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions">http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>