Op vrijdag 05-06-2009 om 23:05 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Anthony W. Youngman:
Hi Anthony, > >> >I think that's a pretty usual setup (most people I know have a 32bit > >> >version > >> >of Linux installed on their laptop even though their CPU is actually > >> >64bit). > > > >Sometimes it makes sense to "do what most people do", esp. if you do it > >as a deliberate choice :-) > > Just as long as you're aware of the consequences ... "what most people > do" is usually a pretty stupid thing to do. Following the herd is fine > if you don't want to stand out, but if you want to make your mark it's > not an option. Yup, that's exactly what I say: consider running 64 bits, even though running 32 bits is what most people do. Is it really necessary to paraphrase that? > >> Note also, that running 32-bit on a 64-bit system can OFTEN be a > >> performance WIN, so you DON'T want to upgrade "just because you can". > > > >I call BS. Ref please? > > Are you saying that 64-bit code is *inherently* more efficient than > 32-bit on a 64-bit system? What I'm trying to say is: please do not spread unsupported rumours, even if they give you a warm fuzzy feeling. You state that > running 32-bit on a 64-bit system can OFTEN be a performance WIN but when asked for a reference, you say > I can't give an actual reference, I'm afraid ...which makes it a rumour. Please try not to spread rumours, that does not help anyone :-) Greetings, Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter Avatar®: http://AvatarAcademy.nl | http://lilypond.org _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
