From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: postpone discussion. Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 10:26:06 -0700 Message-ID: References: <201008151526.30908.stefan.tampe@spray.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1283016579 23147 80.91.229.12 (28 Aug 2010 17:29:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 17:29:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Israelsson Tampe Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 28 19:29:38 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OpPDm-0006nH-15 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2010 19:29:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47355 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OpPDl-0003V8-72 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:29:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58857 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OpPDX-0003UX-Hd for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:29:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OpP7F-0003RS-8w for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:22:54 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:63861 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OpP7F-0003RO-5t for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:22:53 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D104D1A9B; Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:22:53 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=5aGixArhdLJ9FpAWKke8D56Uz0E=; b=vfoest y8LW8EStjt7Qk8ecJYxO6VMDjw4XY9t62yQ4s5o4IvMwArysQu/DCpds5RZqKqda 2AidPrPqcZ1pzM7FOnW43u0knQZiVLiqTdKh20jgMqc8X0WV0JUmZ2Msl3LplkBO KJXF4GoDOF5l+CJRhPCylNi8zVQomwJtN7ICs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=BjYHtDehBWn6BBcqRDRSK3AflQ+rLMVX 2IiJFE7vWFXXIxadopyZOkhyehpZJE9uEoCO79ZWyu/JzIaCaK5ivSzEegLVEvnD 4DBR2lFCmx9ib1TFbm3tMM/BMQZgSdDd9X6ajxWxzWyF5Q0G9oAEdLJd+XnK8m1Y LNtmgwOK0s4= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E90CED1A9A; Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:22:51 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [75.28.21.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 744ABD1A99; Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:22:50 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <201008151526.30908.stefan.tampe@spray.se> (Stefan Israelsson Tampe's message of "Sun, 15 Aug 2010 15:26:30 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E33021AA-B2C8-11DF-BDCE-030CEE7EF46B-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:10798 Archived-At: On Sun 15 Aug 2010 06:26, Stefan Israelsson Tampe writes: > Probably for some interesting applications there will be a hughe > demand on memory. And Keeping the redo tree slim can have a great cost > benefit. I believe it is possible to save like 4x in space. And > certaily 2x if guile was on a 32bit. Now it might be interesting to > have guile in 64bit, but let guile sit on a 32 bit adress > subspace. And only let the redo tree take advantage of adressing more > then 32bits. This would logically save 2x of memory space. So is it > possible to accomplish this? Well, if you want a 32-bit address space... just compile a 32-bit version, right? > Hope this was stimulating. It was interesting. I did not understand it all but am happy to listen :) Andy -- http://wingolog.org/