From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f495c7652c09dd8c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: Does this model work ?
Date: 1999/05/16
Message-ID: <1999May16.133923.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 478530734
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eisner.decus.org
References: <373e38e2.31311363@news2.ibm.net> <7hhj6q$cjn$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <01be9ee1$eca9be10$022a6282@dieppe> <373E24C3.D77A6837@easystreet.com>
X-Trace: news.decus.org 926876365 22602 KILGALLEN [216.44.122.34]
Organization: LJK Software
Reply-To: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-05-16T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <373E24C3.D77A6837@easystreet.com>, Al Christians <achrist@easystreet.com> writes:
> Pascal Obry wrote:
>> 
>> I've not use a language yet that it more portable than Ada.
>> 
> 
> Here's a hypothetical question that I hope you don't think too
> impertinent, and I would be most interested in your learned 
> opinion:
> 
>     How much of the Ada source code available on your web site 
>     can be expected to run without change on a 64-bit machine,  
>     under a  64-bit OS, compiled with a 64-bit Ada compiler, 
>     when all of these become economically available?  (within a 
>     couple of years, I hope)

I am not sure what "economically feasible" means.  A DEC Alpha is
a 64-bit machine, and except for those running Windows NT, it has
64-bit operating systems (Linux, Tru64 Unix(nee Digital Unix(nee
DEC OSF/1)), and VMS).  The Linux configuration for the new EV6
machine starts at US $ 3500.

Ada compiler prices start at "free".

> If Ada code has a portabilitiy advantage, shouldn't Ada advocates
> be planning to advance the language's status as the world struggles
> with the shift to 64 bit machines over the next few years?  (32-bit PC's 
> from Intel were on the street in 1987, but 32-bit software only became
> the norm around 1997)

So long as operating systems support both 32-bit and 64-bit
addressing models, there is no particular need to rush change
until a particular application needs 64-bit addressing.  The
world should not "struggle" with this one at all.

Larry Kilgallen