Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [predef] Status and review results?
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-21 23:26:49

On Sunday 21 April 2013 19:18:35 Rene Rivera wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Lars Viklund <zao_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > I thought that the mongrel ABI was properly called "x32" [1][2][3].
> > Searching for x86_32 just seems to hit a bunch of confused people
> > actually meaning the regular boring 32-bit x86.
> >
> > While they made an odd naming decision calling it "x32", calling it
> > something else than what it's actually called would be a disservice.
> Indeed.. I might consider adding an ARCH_X86_X32. Although more appropriate
> might be ARCH_X86_64_X32. But I'm somewhat reticent to add an ARCH that is
> just an "emulation" running on X86_64.

Well, this is a new ABI rather than a new hardware architecture. You could
define a new set of macros for detecting ABIs. But it is treated as a distinct
architecture in the compiler and OS, so I'm not sure a different set of macros
is a good idea. Also I'm not aware of any other precedents.

PS: I like ARCH_X86_X32 more.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at