Subject: Re: [boost] [predef] Status and review results?
From: Petr Machata (pmachata_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-23 11:08:57
Bjorn Reese <breese_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On 04/23/2013 05:45 AM, Rene Rivera wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Petr Machata <pmachata_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> It's intentional. As, AFAIK, PA-RISC is the common name for that
>> architecture. And also the macros it's based on for the version information
>> are also PA_RISC.
> I think he is refering to the RISK versus RISC spelling.
Yes, that was my point.
>> I can't claim to know much about those.. But is __SYSC_ZARCH__ enough ro
>> match any z/Architecture regardless of the s390 defines? If you think those
> Not really. __SYSC_ZARCH__ is only defined by the Dignum Systems/C++
Right. What I meant to say was that __SYSC_ZARCH__ is not defined by
GCC at all. On GCC, __s390__ is the define for both, and __s390x__
explicitly for the 64-bit one.
>>> 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.
>> Hm.. Perhaps. Is that a popular understanding of those architectures?
> z/Architecture is LP64, and is backwards compatible with System/390
> which is ILP32 (well almost, as pointers are only 31-bits wide.) See:
Right. To answer the original question, yes, I believe that's a popular
understanding. E.g. GCC for s390x can produce s390 binaries when given
the -m31 command-line option. strace and ltrace compiled for s390x can
"cross-trace" s390 processes. 64-bit s390x Linux kernel supports
launching processes in 31-bit execution mode. Etc. Exactly the same as
for x86_64/x86 or ppc64/ppc.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk