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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,124905131f269735 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-09-28 04:05:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: gnat and heap size Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 12:58:01 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9ovlqq$gld$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <1001442590.557811@news.drenet.dnd.ca> <%26s7.4950$ev2.8194@www.newsranger.com> <9oqs5k$jjq$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9osjpt$a5l$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9osq5a$crn$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9ov8a4$b71$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1001609882 17069 136.170.200.133 (27 Sep 2001 16:58:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Sep 2001 16:58:02 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13460 Date: 2001-09-27T16:58:02+00:00 List-Id: Are we getting dangerously close to discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? :-) BTW: I think a sugar cube is a little closer to a half inch - maybe 3/4 inch - also depending on the particular brand. (Some are square while others are more "Domino" shaped... Pun intended.) I'll bet that we will continue to see some really major advances in storage technology in the years to come. A 64-bit address is probably a little large for anything that is likely to hit the market in the next couple of years, so why design in that limitation? But is it reasonably forseeable that we might want 128 bit addresses for anything? At some point, that starts becoming the construction of the proverbial brick outhouse.... MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Dale Pennington" wrote in message news:GKBxLF.ICJ@news.boeing.com... > You might note, that is one sugar cube was one terrabyte (i.e. 10**12 > bytes), then it would take a MegaSugarCube with approximately 262 sugar > cubes to a side to hold 2**64 bytes of data. I am not sure of the dimensions > of a sugar cube, but if one were to assume a 0.25" sugar cube, that would be > be about 5 1/2" per side cube. Note too bad for a fixed site, but a but > large for a laptop. >