Hello, On 2018-03-11 15:33, Peter Bex wrote: > On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 02:37:01PM +0100, felix.winkelm...@bevuta.com wrote: > > > PS: What about mingw64? Should we define that as a separate software > > > version? Or maybe just rename it to "mingw" for both? > > > > I'd say use "mingw" for both, one can use the "64bit" feature to > > distinguish them. > > After some thought, perhaps this introduces a needless change, given that > people can already cond-expand on (mingw32) right now (with my patch that > didn't change). That means another porting hassle.
I'm not sure what's best here, but I'm leaning towards just "mingw". If I understand the different versions of MinGW correctly (and it's unlikely that I do...), there is both mingw32 (http://mingw.org) and mingw-w64 (http://mingw-w64.org), which are different things: the former is the old name for "normal" MinGW (according to Wikipedia, anyway), while the latter is a fork of that. So, using "mingw32" might be misleading, since we define just the one feature for both of these variants. Perhaps someone with a better understanding of these projects could chime in. Otherwise, I'm partial to just "mingw", since we don't differentiate. > > Actually, some quasi-parameter like "(word-size)" might be a good > > idea, what do you think? > > I think that could be useful, yeah. In chicken.platform, presumably? +1 Cheers, Evan _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chickenemail@example.com https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers