Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Rene Rivera (grafik666_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-10 17:29:58

On 2002-06-10 at 06:18 PM, david.abrahams_at_[hidden] (David Abrahams) wrote:

>From: "Rene Rivera" <grafik666_at_[hidden]>
>> On 2002-06-10 at 05:58 PM, david.abrahams_at_[hidden] (David Abrahams) wrote:
>> >
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "Rene Rivera" <grafik666_at_[hidden]>
>> >instruction-set
>> >>
>> >> (I wish that could be "feature instruction-set", but I don't think it
>> >will
>> >> work as well in the current system)
>> >
>> >Why not?
>> :-) Because I can't remember if setting the gLINK_COMPATIBLE(?) will
>> or how to set it to allow that.
>Why would you want to? Aren't different instruction sets mutually

Yes, and no...

Some examples:

architecture: x86
instruction-set: x586 & k6 are link compatible
architecture: mips
instruction-set: mips2, mips3, & mips4 are link compatible

That is within one architecture instructure sets tend to be link compatible.
This granularity might be usefull if you are wrtting code which you tune to
a specific CPU but don't care about the rest of the code. Game engines are
the biggest example of this type of use.

-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera_at_[hidden] - grafik_at_[hidden]
-- 102708583_at_icq - Grafik666_at_AIM - Grafik_at_[hidden]


Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at