Re: [boost] [predef] Status and review results?

Subject: Re: [boost] [predef] Status and review results?
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-25 22:54:21

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Petr Machata <pmachata_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> 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.
>

D'oh.. Yes, it's a typo :-\

> >> 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++
> > compiler.
>
> 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.
>

OK, thanks for the clarifications. I'd say it's then safe to add a category
for those. Perhaps ARCH_SYSZ. And the defs could be ARCH_SYSZ_64 and
ARCH_SYSZ_S390 (and dropping 370).

-- 
-- 
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com
-- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo