Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Snit <CSMA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 13:23:31 -0700
"Daniel Johnson" <danieljohnson2@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
13n5dr2pngnpe4b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 12/26/07 1:19 PM:
"Snit" <CSMA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:C397C86E.9F148%CSMA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Daniel Johnson" <danieljohnson2@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in postWell, that's overstating it. It's a nice clean model that has held up quite
13n4li53ularqcd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 12/26/07 6:25 AM:
Even this sounds like a lot of windows, but every panel and control uses
one
of those handles, and actually the space is shared with other things too.
The
upshot is that if you heavily use a program that isn't careful about
this, you
can exhast those 10,000 handles- and then your program fails in weird and
mysterious ways.
I have a programmer friend who has not only hit this limit but also, on more
occasions, bemoaned the fact that the Windows windowing model is completely
whacked.
well over quite a long time. But there is a downside to treating
window-handles as a shared resource- it means that one process can exhaust the
supply for everyone. It helps to have a larger supply to start with.
I do not know the details but he was talking about how each widget is
treated, in some instances, like it was its own window. Just weird to work
with.
[snip]
I do not know how a big a problem it was for them. I'd imagine that it wasBut Mathematica does not demonstrate that Carbon is 64-bit: rather it showsAny reason to think it was a big problem for the makers of Mathematica?
that with sufficient sweat you can work around these problems. That is
always true.
actually not that hard, since Mathematica has the Command Line Nature, if you
see what I mean.
I imagine that is why Mathematica did it, when other programs didn't bother.
For most programs on the Mac, Tiger's 64-bit support was just too incomplete
to use.
What other programs had pretty big use for it but did not use it?
--
Satan lives for my sins... now *that* is dedication!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Daniel Johnson
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- References:
- 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Jesper
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Snit
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Ilgaz Öcal
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Snit
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Lefty Bigfoot
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Daniel Johnson
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Snit
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Daniel Johnson
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Snit
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Daniel Johnson
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Snit
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Daniel Johnson
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Snit
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Daniel Johnson
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Snit
- Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- From: Daniel Johnson
- 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- Prev by Date: Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- Next by Date: Re: apple iTunes servers "MELT DOWN"!!!!!
- Previous by thread: Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- Next by thread: Re: 32 bit vista can't address more than 3.1-3.5 GB RAM
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|