Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by tekacs 4381 days ago
... I think the implication is that more than 4GB would exceed the pre-[PAE][1] memory limit[2]. A form of cross-compilation might work, though PyPy build isn't exactly a simple, 'classical' build process. :P

Edit: also, looking at your comments[3E] it looks like surely you know this (sorry) so I'm now really not sure what you're getting at... :P

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

[2]: and even with PAE you still need to split into multiple processes/address spaces to do anything useful

[3E]: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=sitkack
1 comments
sitkack 4380 days ago
My point is requiring a lot of ram for a build is not a problem. Yes it would be nice to support low end devices for PyPy compilation, but the set of people on extremely constrained hardware and those people doing development on PyPy that would need to build from source is well, by definition zero.

32 bit is dead except for ARM, and it will be dead on ARM in 4 years.

link
tekacs 4378 days ago
> 32 bit is dead except for ARM, and it will be dead on ARM in 4 years.

Uh... sure? ... but the parent post was about how building for 32 bit _today_ simply does not work and will not work.

Whilst it's not necessarily best to build for technology almost gone, there definitely will continue to exist 32 bit devices that people would expect to run Python on for quite a number of years yet - today's 32 bit ARM chips aren't going anywhere awhile and not every form factor (say non-desktop) is well suited to a 64+-bit architecture. :/

link
sitkack 4376 days ago
Remember we are talking about _building_, actually JITing a JIT using a dynamic language _for_ a dynamic language.

I haven't run a 32 bit desktop or server system since 2004. 32 bit is quite dead. In 4 years, only the cheapest ARM SoCs will be 32 bits. In embedded devices, yes 32 bits will be around for a great long while.

link