64 bit processor and emacs

64 bit processor and emacs

[Harry Putnam]

Any one here have experience with emacs on a 64 bit processor?
If so, are there got_chas or what ever.  Is anyone here who can
summarize why a 64 bit processor is good or better?  AT least
privately if its too off topic here.

Re: 64 bit processor and emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com>
> Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:37:59 -0600
> 
> Any one here have experience with emacs on a 64 bit processor?
> If so, are there got_chas or what ever.  Is anyone here who can
> summarize why a 64 bit processor is good or better?  AT least
> privately if its too off topic here.

Emacs supports 64-bit builds on a few platforms, as described in NEWS.
The primary advantage is that the maximum buffer size is greatly
enlarged.

What else do you need to know?

Re: 64 bit processor and emacs

[Harry Putnam]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il> writes:

>> From: Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com>
>> Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:37:59 -0600
>> 
>> Any one here have experience with emacs on a 64 bit processor?
>> If so, are there got_chas or what ever.  Is anyone here who can
>> summarize why a 64 bit processor is good or better?  AT least
>> privately if its too off topic here.
>
> Emacs supports 64-bit builds on a few platforms, as described in NEWS.
> The primary advantage is that the maximum buffer size is greatly
> enlarged.
>
> What else do you need to know?

Thanks Eli,
I'm building up a system for editing and capturing video.  I'm
looking at athlon 64 bit processor.   Near as I can tell, I'll have
to leave my favorite linux OS behind to take advantage of the
software for this kind of work that is available for MicroSoft OS.

I was afraid I might have a problem getting a good working install of
emacs which I would be lost without.  So it will likely be Athlon64
FX and Win XP pro.

I'm not that conversant on windows OS.  I know people run emacs on it
and I've seen many posts from you relating to emacs on that os.

I guess it would just be the normal ntemacs type of install?

Re: 64 bit processor and emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com>
> Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 07:11:54 -0600
> 
> I'm not that conversant on windows OS.  I know people run emacs on it
> and I've seen many posts from you relating to emacs on that os.
> 
> I guess it would just be the normal ntemacs type of install?

Yes.  I hear that the Windows port can be built as a 64-bit binary,
but I never did that myself nor saw anyone else doing it.

Re: 64 bit processor and emacs

[Stefan Monnier]

>>> Any one here have experience with Emacs on a 64 bit processor?
>>> If so, are there got_chas or what ever.  Is anyone here who can
>>> summarize why a 64 bit processor is good or better?  At least
>>> privately if its too off topic here.
>> 
>> Emacs supports 64-bit builds on a few platforms, as described in NEWS.
>> The primary advantage is that the maximum buffer size is greatly
>> enlarged.

Note that buffers larger than 2GB will still probably suffer bugs
if you platform uses 64bit `long' but 32bit `int'.
This is part of the 64bit support in Emacs that has not been properly
fixed/debugged yet.  But I haven't heard any user ever complain about it,
so it must be a rather rare occurrence.

> I'm building up a system for editing and capturing video.  I'm
> looking at athlon 64 bit processor.   Near as I can tell, I'll have
> to leave my favorite linux OS behind to take advantage of the
> software for this kind of work that is available for MicroSoft OS.

I hope not.

> I was afraid I might have a problem getting a good working install of
> Emacs which I would be lost without.  So it will likely be Athlon64
> FX and Win XP pro.

I don't think Emacs has been ported to w64 yet.  But you'll be able to use
the standard w32 version of Emacs (aka NTEmacs ) on it anyway, so there's
nothing to worry about.


        Stefan

Re: 64 bit processor and emacs

[Jason Dufair]

Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> writes:

> I guess it would just be the normal ntemacs type of install?

If you're accustomed to working in Unix/Linux, I recommend the Cygwin
Emacs instead of NTEmacs.  It's just a bit more unix-y and plays nice in
the Win32 environment otherwise.  I realize this is a bit vague, but
it's worth a look for anyone switching from Unix/Linux to Win32.

-- 
Jason Dufair - jase@dufair.org
http://www.dufair.org/
"The oldest one despairs: Will I die in this place?
The one of middle years searches: How did I come to this place?
The youngest one wonders: What is this place?"
-- ToasterLeavings