> Since no one else has responded, here's some stuff from MS on the > topic of Win64: > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/platform/strategic/64bit.asp Thanks, this makes more sense. I guess that Trent's interest in Win64 has to do with an early shipment of Itaniums that ActiveState might have received. :-) The document confirms my feeling that WIN64 vs WIN32, unlike WIN32 vs WIN16, is mostly a compiler issue, and not a user experience or OS functionality issue. The table lists increased limits, not new software subsystems. So I still think that sys.platform should be 'win32', to avoid breaking existing apps. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4