Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [Build] x32
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-11-28 13:13:53

On 28.11.2017 08:07, James E. King, III via Boost wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Roger Leigh via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 28/11/17 09:19, Olaf van der Spek via Boost wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> libboost_system-vc141-mt-gd-x32-1_66.lib
>>> Why is this named x32? AFAIK the normal name is x86.
>> Also, x32 also is used to mean something quite different:
>> (x64 ABI with 4-byte addressing,
>> but all the other extensions available such as extra registers, SSE).
> This pull request references x32 in Boost.Build:
> Suggest you open a github issue on Boost.Build.
> (I would also expect to see "x86", "x86_64", etc...)

Indeed. I objected to this naming in my review of the above PR, but was
Why does Boost always choose to reinvent wheels and ignore existing
practices ?? This seems a severe form of NIH.


      ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...

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