32bit-64bit

This is weird. Earlier, running Windows 7 x64, I had trouble calling the Win32 OpenProcess against 64-bit processes. Googled around a bit, and came to the sinking conclusion this just wasn't gonna happen. Then a funny thing happened. I tried it against the process ID for explorer.exe, and holy carp , it worked! Started throwing other process IDs at it, and it's just a darned crapshoot. As it turns out, I can call OpenProcess against a good number of x64 processes -- explorer, itype, ipoint, taskhost, cmd, mstsc, ..., etc. And others pop a 5 (Access is denied) -- winlogon, csrss, services,

JavaFX 2 is highly dependent on native code. For my desktop application, I would like to select the best-matching JavaFX flavor for each supported OS to make the installation on the target systems as painless as possible. Since JavaFX 2 comes with several Ant tasks to help with deployment, I thought this was the way to go, but I seem to have hit a dead end. The deploy task generates a JNLP file which includes a resource reference that calls the JavaFX installer: <resources> <jfx:javafx-runtime version="2.1+" ref="http://javadl.sun.com/webapps/download/GetFile/javafx-latest/windows-i586/javafx2

I use some C++ code to take a text file from a database and create a dgcMatrix type sparse matrix from the Matrix package. For the first time, I'm trying to build a matrix that has more than 2^31-1 non-sparse members, which means that the index vector in the sparse matrix object must also be longer than that limit. Unfortunately, vectors seem to use 32-bit integer indices, as do NumericVectors in Rcpp. Short of writing an entire new data type from the ground up, does R provide any facility for this? I don't think I can use too exotic a solution as I need glmnet to recognize the resultant

I have a DLL written in C in source code. This is the code for the General Polygon Clipper (in case you are interested). I'm using it in a C# project via the C# wrapper provided on the homepage. This comes with a precompiled DLL. Since switching to a 64bit Development machine with Visual Studio 2010 and Windows 7 64 bit, the application won't run anymore. This is the error I get: An attempt was made to load a program with an incorrect format. This is because of DLLImport ing the 32bit gpc.dll , as I have gathered from stuff found on the web. I assume this will all go away if I recompile the

I'm stuck for a full afternoon now trying to get python to build in 32bit mode. I run a 64bit Linux machine with openSUSE 11.3, I have the necessary -devel and -32bit packages installed to build applications in 32bit mode. The problem with the python build seems to be not in the make run itself, but in the afterwards run of setup.py, invoked by make. I found the following instructions for Ubuntu Linux: h**p://indefinitestudies.org/2010/02/08/how-to-build-32-bit-python-on-ubuntu-9-10-x86_64/ When I do as described, I get the following output: http://pastebin.com/eP8WJ8V4 But I have the -32bit

I think under windows x64, it still uses user32.dll and a bunch of other 32 bit libraries. Why there is no user64.dll? C:\Windows\System32\user32.dll is a 64-bit library. The 32-bit version is in C:\Windows\SysWOW64\user32.dll . They can't change any names because that would break all sorts of programs with hard-coded paths. The names "user32" and "system32" and so on existed long before the modern 64-bit editions of Windows. The names were intended to distinguish them from the 16-bit versions, not from the 64-bit versions. On 64-bit Windows, it's still not 16-bit, so it's still "system32",

The x86-64 instruction set adds more registers and other improvements to help streamline executable code. However, in many applications the increased pointer size is a burden. The extra, unused bytes in every pointer clog up the cache and might even overflow RAM. GCC, for example, builds with the -m32 flag, and I assume this is the reason. It's possible to load a 32-bit value and treat it as a pointer. This doesn't necessitate extra instructions, just load/compute the 32 bits and load from the resulting address. The trick won't be portable, though, as platforms have different memory maps. On

Inside Visual Studio 2010, I've set my application to target version 4 of the .NET Framework and for "All CPUs". As some of our users are 64-bit while others are 32-bit, I assume one would choose All CPUs. Is that correct? On a particular user's 32-bit Windows 7 SP1 machine, the framework installation (via ClickOnce) is failing with an error code 5100, which according to this MSDN article , indicates that The user's computer does not meet system requirements . The user's PC is 32-bit Windows 7 SP1, so I wonder if the command argument 'FullX64Bootstrapper' is correct in the first place? This