From: joemonk64@gmail.com   
      
   > No, just because my 32-bit executable can tolerate being run   
   > on environments that offer less than 32 address lines, or more than   
   > 32 address lines, or exactly 32 address lines, does not alter the   
   > fact that it is a 32-bit executable (which is why it can only address   
   > 4 GB of memory, even if you make infinite address lines available).   
   >   
   > Although it would still be amusing to find out what your actually   
   > definition of "x-bit executable" is. You don't seem to be able to   
   > identify an executable that cannot address more than 4 GB   
   > as 32-bit. Every time IBM comes up with a new machine (or if   
   > they have built multiple machines, which they have), you run   
   > around in circles trying to figure out what number to give it.   
   >   
   > You don't seem to be alone. This mainframe "culture" is one of   
   > the things that overcomplicates it to the point that people who   
   > have been programming on it for decades end up running   
   > around in circles when someone from an independent environment   
   > points out their misconception.   
   >   
      
   It is YOU who doesnt understand. You use a 32-bit pointer. So what? If I take   
   a 32-bit pointer and stick it in a 64-bit register, I am STILL addressing   
   64-bits. All 64-bits are significant.   
      
   And in AM64, the addresses arent limited to 2^32 -1.   
      
   Joe   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)