Scheme vs. CommonLisp vs. the World
Tue, 13 May 1997 11:36:01 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:51 -0400
From: Kalman Reti <reti@RIVERSIDE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:21 EDT
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Henry G. Baker)
Perhaps the 'digits'/'bigits' should be 64 bits instead of 32
This would solve the problem I was talking about as well.
But, but, if we go with 32-bit object references on 32-machines, that
means these "bigits" will have to be heap consed. And if you are
doing that, it is only a short step to having real bignums.
I can see using big 64- or 128-bit IDs regardless of the underlying
architecture (they would be great for really big, distributed OODBs)
so we could use an immediate representation for bigits, but 1) there
would be a big performance hit for not using the architectural sizes,
and 2) we'd have to do a *lot* more from scratch rather than adapting,
say, CMUCL and Flux.