Hello all,
>________________________________________
>From: Thiago Macieira [[email protected]]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 8:59 AM
>
>On Wednesday 20. October 2010 07.49.07 Carsten Munk wrote:
>> Line 72, we really need to spell out that it is ARMv7, EABI, softfp
>> (for 1.1) as there is emerging tendancies in industry to use hardfp
>> too.
>We should really REALLY consider switching to hardfp in a later release. 
>That means breaking binary compatibility.

Yes, I agree. It was actually my mistake that we don't have hardfb already.
I didn't understand early enough what kind of change that is etc from
toolchain point of view. 

The point is that for MeeGo to be competitive enough we must use what
the hw has to provide, and now it should be possible to use hardfb as well, 
when some work has been done with the toolchain.

I propose, that we don't specify softfp as the baseline for complience,
but rather say that current softfp is temporary phase and we will move 
to hardfp as soon as possible, potentially in 1.1 update if we will have
such a thing.

(And If we are not planning 1.1 update for any other reason, this is
  good enough reason to have it.)

Anyway, for MeeGo 1.2 hardfp is must on ARM architecture side.  

Br,
//Harri

_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to