Time for 64-bit longs?

[mouse at mcgill-vision.UUCP]

In article <66 at umich.UUCP>, jtr485 at umich.UUCP (Johnathan Tainter) writes:
> In article <260 at vax1.ccs.cornell.edu>, jsm at vax1.UUCP writes:
>> In article <848 at epimass.UUCP> jbuck at epimass.UUCP (Joe Buck) writes:
>>> Has anyone bit the bullet and gone to 64-bit longs?
>> And will the future 128-byte pointer be a "long long long" ?
> Even assuming you meant 128-bit address,just what do you propose
> doing with that pointer?  Going to assign every quark in the universe
> its own address?

Just because the poor guy slipped up and wrote "pointer", don't come
down too hard.  I would certainly like a C compiler which used
short=16, int=32, long=64.  Eventually, on a 64-bit machine, short=32,
int=64, long=128.

2^128 ~= 1.7E38, surely there are more than 2E38 quarks.

					der Mouse

USA: {ihnp4,decvax,akgua,utzoo,etc}!utcsri!mcgill-vision!mouse
     think!mosart!mcgill-vision!mouse
Europe: mcvax!decvax!utcsri!mcgill-vision!mouse
ARPAnet: think!mosart!mcgill-vision!mouse at harvard.harvard.edu