Re: Carbon, Cocoa, and 64 bits - I'm confused

• Subject: Re: Carbon, Cocoa, and 64 bits - I'm confused
• From: "Clark Cox" <email@hidden>
• Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:25:47 -0700
• Delivered-to: email@hidden
• Delivered-to: email@hidden
• Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=mq5EkK0Xso5Cu0k+bUdbRY+wq3/WZ4sPfjRVBEdEMByOYssbLhTCIXc0G8gPG666HUb2gCnFHglzboqNTozE2oc3dA1erOwCorhgFQCVlgPBrFe/stz/pEnqxxxCUKVn9aPrXBQDsW8FRpkwGxXSADd09XoKtH1KCcajH7VNSdo=
• Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=QAcm5oLphCoYGnpSEDuBylACp6A7FeWRg5vHnnQRlg6psdDNmHwQl76Cvsm7yGPN7+HwW4gp9ZWN8xXQfP+Y/vEFQR+j0Ss9OvlZsLUffJk886W0jP/JveJGsLcKRJGq55eMJkpDJLUu9AXtDPPNylC+D0kKejAlNcG7R1Mj2FQ=

On 6/28/07, Tim Jones <email@hidden> wrote:
> Okay, even though I swore that I wouldn't add fuel to this fire, I'm
> totally confused as to the level of confusion that I'm reading
> (discounting the C/C++ vs. ObjC arguments).  From what I see, Carbon
> isn't going away, it's just not getting the full 64 bit monty.  How
> does that affect my Carbon UI development?  It doesn't unless I need
> to display a 2TB+ image in a window, or display 2TB+ of cell contents
> simultaneously in a table (yeh, right).  So my confusion is that I
> don't understand how not having a 64 bit UI API will really affect
> Carbon users.  If I've got a huge data model that requires 64 bit
> value handling, I don't need to use Carbon UI functions, so I'm not
> limited by Carbon's lack of 64 bit underpinnings.  Is not having a
> "UI is 64 bit" checkbox on product datasheets that big of a deal for
> customers' perception of a product?

First, the barrier is gigabytes, not terabytes.  Second, what you're not seeing:
1) It's much easier to write programs if you don't need to split them
into a 32-bit UI and a 64-bit worker.

No argument there

2) Data exchange between 32-bit and 64-bit programs is slow.  You
can't just map memory back and forth.

Yes, you can. I have done this in Tiger apps running on the G5. You
can have the same physical memory mapped into a 32-bit and a 64-bit
process, and it all just works as you would expect. Indeed, this is a
way to allow a 32-bit app to access more than 4GB of physical memory.
Map and unmap the pages as you work with them, and let the VM system
worry about keeping them resident (which, absent any memory pressure
it does just fine).

--
Clark S. Cox III
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
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

• Prev by Date: Re: Carbon accessory view hierarchies in 10.5 NavServices; interaction with Compositing
• Next by Date: Re: Is Carbon Viable?
• Previous by thread: Re: Carbon, Cocoa, and 64 bits - I'm confused
• Next by thread: Re: Carbon, Cocoa, and 64 bits - I'm confused
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread