Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [predef] Status and review results?
From: Petr Machata (pmachata_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-22 11:57:03

Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Just a quick message to mention that I've finished all the review related
> changes to the Predef library.
> [...] browse the current documentation at <>.

I noticed that HP/PA RISC architecture seems to be tied to macro
BOOST_ARCH_PARISK. Is that intentional, or a typo?

Regarding System/360 and its descendands. A defined __s390x__ actually
indicates z/Architecture. If __s390__ is defined, it could be either
System/390, or a z/Architecture. FWIW, GCC doesn't seem to define
__SYSC_ZARCH__ for z/Architecture machines.

I always considered the relation betwenn z/Architecture and s390 to be
approximately the same as between i386 and x86_64. Maybe it would make
sense to have an overarching is-z-system define, similar to
BOOST_ARCH_X86? No idea what to call it though.

Also, does it even make sense to add S/370 defines? Can one actually
meet such environment in practice? I know that ptrace layer in Linux
kernel recently started requiring proper setting of 31bit/24bit
backward-compatible flag, so I don't know... maybe there are people
actually running 24bit systems. It just somehow seems strange ;)

Last, do you envision adding defines for 64-bit PowerPC? I don't know
the history here, apparently there's also that RS6000 business that I'm
not familiar with at all, but FWIW, __powerpc64__ is the define on
Linux. Similarly to above, __powerpc__ would be defined for any
PowerPC, 32- or 64-bit one.

Oh, and I just realized that there's that 64-bit ARM being cooked.
__aarch64__ is the define to check for on Linux.


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