3 Apr
2010
3 Apr
'10
2:11 p.m.
On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 13:12:20 +1030, Mark Smith said:
going to be enough. I'm not sure why the 32 bit address size was persisted with at that point - maybe it was because there would be significant performance loss in handling addresses greater than what was probably the most common host word size at the time.
I've always been surprised that the early preponderance of 36-bit machines (DEC -10/20, Multics boxes) didn't stick us with a 36 bit address. That would have bought us a few more decades. ;)