dotgnu-pnet
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[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


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]