Poll: Primary D version

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 05/22/2010 02:38 PM, retard wrote:
> Sat, 22 May 2010 15:28:54 -0400, Adam Ruppe wrote:
>
>> On 5/22/10, retard<re at tard.com.invalid>  wrote:
>>> On a 4 GB system you lose 600+ MB of memory when using a 32-bit
>>> operating system without PAE support.
>>
>> You can run 32 bit programs on a 64 bit operating system. The point
>> isn't that 64 bits is useless in general, it is just that most
>> *applications* work just fine as 32 bit binaries.
>
> I can't believe the 64-bit processes are twice as large. Typically the
> binary size is only a fraction of the amount of data processed by the
> application. Moreover, most of the memory allocations contain array like
> structures for storing bitmaps, I/O buffers etc. For example, if you're
> storing 8-bit pixels in a game, you're not forced to use int64 data type
> on a 64-bit architecture.

It all depends on what the largest payload is. One of my apps' largest 
structures was a hash, which was almost twice as large in the 64-bit 
version.

Andrei