Subject: Re: [boost] Build breaking changes
From: Robert (r.firl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-03-29 15:17:06
On 3/28/2018 9:51 PM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 5:49 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> If someone wants to target an outdated architecture (and 32-bit x86 really is
>> a separate architecture, including hardware features and software ABI) then
>> let them do that with a little more effort. The rest of the world have moved to 64 bits
>> long ago, and that is what we should target by default, IMO.
> No they have not all "moved on to 64 bits." Most programs work
> perfectly fine as 32-bit applications and have no need for the ability
> to access a full 64-bit address space. In fact many programs perform
> objectively worse as 64-bit application since pointers and data
> structures become larger without a corresponding benefit. This is
> especially true for mobile applications.
Note that the Visual Studio 2017 default for all new projects/solutions
is 32-bit, x86 (aka Win32). In older Visual Studio releases, extra
mouse clicks are required to configure a project to compile as x64. If
there are a family of projects within an existing solution, then all
projects individual project files will likely have to be manually edited
to support x64. Ask me how I know.
Also note that until proven otherwise, the Boost Unit Test Adapter fork
by Microsoft only integrates with Visual Studio 2017 correctly when set
to x86 | Release. No other configuration setting will run within the
IDE, let alone integrate correctly with the Visual Studio 2017
environment. When this is finally fixed, I have no idea. You will have
to ask the Microsoft team managing the Boost Unit Test Adapter fork.
> Rumors of 32-bit apps' demise are greatly exaggerated.
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk