[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Suspicous code in kdelibs-3.5.2
From:       Oswald Buddenhagen <ossi () kde ! org>
Date:       2006-04-06 7:04:07
Message-ID: 20060406070407.GA3903 () ugly ! local
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 06:41:55PM -0500, Stefan Teleman wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 April 2006 19:21, you wrote:
> > can do, sure. which ones do, though? if it's not an issue people
> > actually run into, then i don't think it is worth rewriting that
> > particular bit of code.
> 
> Pretty much any RISC machine. Reasonably speaking, any RISC machine
> still in use (UltraSPARC, PowerPC, HP-PA -- i think KDE works on
> HP/UX). I don't know if KDE works on IRIX 6.5 on R/6000. :-)
> 
> Solaris does on both UltraSPARC and X86/X64 (Opteron). I'm almost
> certain MacOS X on PowerPC and AIX do too.
> 
> I don't know if Intel EMT64 (Xeon/Pentium 4 && friends) are NUMA. Need
> input from an Intel guru.
> 
yes? and how many compilers do you know that would be even remotely able
to optimize such cases? i'd be too interested in knowing how they do it.
honestly, i think trying to apply NUMA as an example here is a dead end.
using complex structures transparently might be used on segmented
architectures where offset calculations with segments are impossible
(e.g., i286 (16 bit) protected mode). i don't think this applies to any
architecture [prospectively] supported by kde.

-- 
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
--
Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]