Re: Is Carbon Viable?

• Subject: Re: Is Carbon Viable?
• From: Tony Scaminaci <email@hidden>
• Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
• Delivered-to: email@hidden
• Delivered-to: email@hidden
• Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=D19/kKZdqDbRz0AgWhlfXn2mT/R8WbIxwLt02sjlHMaw+Mcxp2bLu7w+vdVU4BkDgjPYSfcJLVAJjW0fUbX6zBnDulIeZIQkGhy3T27ktLGSNNlSW8/aQtNNYhyTUbas/PYjahagqGqjCKS0cKrHesBd7cNMv0UPgr2m0JDjKAk=;

But a 32-bit GUI won't compile in 64-bit mode for
those apps that need to run in 64-bit mode to address
more than 4G of memory. So Carbon isn't a viable
platforam as more apps move to 64-bit unless we're
sure we only use those parts of Carbon that are 64-bit
compliant. At least until the next release when Apple
decides to deprecate the 64-bit functionality we had
before...

--- Laurence Harris <email@hidden> wrote:
> Since 32-bit applications can run on 64-bit Macs, I
> don't follow this  
> logic.
> 
> Larry

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Carbon-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/carbon-dev/email@hidden

This email sent to email@hidden

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Is Carbon Viable?
    • From: Laurence Harris <email@hidden>

• Prev by Date: Re: Is Carbon Viable?
• Next by Date: Re: Is Carbon Viable?
• Previous by thread: Re: Is Carbon Viable?
• Next by thread: Re: Is Carbon Viable?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread