From: muta...@gmail.com   
      
   On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:21:33 PM UTC+8, Joe Monk wrote:   
   > > And this is 32-bit not 31-bit. It's running AM64 so there is   
   > > no-one who is going to truncate 33 (not a typo) bits.   
   > >   
   > No, if its running in AM64, then it is 64-bit.   
      
   If you want to call my executables that only use S/370 instructions,   
   only use the lower 32 bits of registers, only store integers and pointers   
   in 4 bytes, "64 bit" because they happen to be running in AM64, so   
   be it.   
      
   And presumably when the exact same executable runs on a real   
   S/370, you would call it a 24-bit program.   
      
   So my executables have a random number of bitness.   
      
   Go for it.   
      
   > Hence, your statement is gibberish. You cant truncate 33 bits because there   
   arent 33 bits to truncate, all 64-bits are used.   
      
   Under my design, when a 32/random-bit executable of mine is   
   running above the 4 GiB proper-bar, I will be managing the top   
   32 bits in z/PDOS-generic. Sort of expanding/truncating it.   
   The application has no knowledge of that. Although it could find   
   out if it used non-S/390 instructions.   
      
   BFN. Paul.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)