The 32-bit platform can do this same trick, so, your 64-bit pointers are still wider than theirs, and you didn't gain anything unless you also steal high bits.
This isn't quite entirely true, for them address space is very tight and so they daren't just align everything and risk wasting too much address space, whereas on a 64-bit platform you can afford to be very generous with address space. This is akin to how it's fine to have randomised privacy addressing in IPv6, but that'd be a problem in IPv4. But this gain is hard to give a specific value to, whereas the simple fact is that 64-bit pointers are exactly twice as big as 32-bit pointers.
This can give you the incentive to build a different data structure, it's surprising how often "Just use a vector" is correct these days, Chandler Carruth has talked about that at length (in C++). If you have at least some idea how many Foozles you need, and Foozles aren't some crazy multi-page data structure, chances are you should put all the Foozles in a vector, and not carry around actual pointers to Foozles at all.
This isn't quite entirely true, for them address space is very tight and so they daren't just align everything and risk wasting too much address space, whereas on a 64-bit platform you can afford to be very generous with address space. This is akin to how it's fine to have randomised privacy addressing in IPv6, but that'd be a problem in IPv4. But this gain is hard to give a specific value to, whereas the simple fact is that 64-bit pointers are exactly twice as big as 32-bit pointers.
This can give you the incentive to build a different data structure, it's surprising how often "Just use a vector" is correct these days, Chandler Carruth has talked about that at length (in C++). If you have at least some idea how many Foozles you need, and Foozles aren't some crazy multi-page data structure, chances are you should put all the Foozles in a vector, and not carry around actual pointers to Foozles at all.