On 2017-10-10 06:52-0400 Jim Dishaw wrote:
[]
I read the MSDN Documentation as well as the Intel, MinGW, and GNU compiler
documentation.
The WIN32 should not be used and appears to be an older convention The MSDN
and Intel documentation define _WIN32 and _WIN64. MinGW appears to be
Hi Alan,
> -Original Message-
> From: Alan W. Irwin [mailto:ir...@beluga.phys.uvic.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 1:36 PM
>
> My understanding is non-POSIX Cygwin is a thing of the past, i.e., you have
> the
> POSIX version where no variant of WIN32 is #defined. But to be
Hi Arjen:
I agree its a dated table. So, for example, it is possible
MinGW-w64 later severely changed course from the documentation
of the classical MinGW in this table. However, if we changed
to _WIN32, and MinGW-w64 did not #define that
then your comprehensive test of MinGW-w64/MSYS2
would
Hi Alan,
I have had a look at the two discussions Alaric and you mention, and I agree
that the best choice seems to be _WIN32 to indicate the Windows platform. I
hesitate, however, to be absolutely sure, on the following grounds:
-The tip on detecting the operating systems mentions
Hi Arjen:
I am addressing you because you are our primary Windows platform
expert, but I would be happy to hear from others here as well
(including Alaric) with some knowledge of that platform.
What would be your advice concerning replacing our use of the WIN32
and __WIN32__ macros in our
