This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [ping] Re: proper name of i386/x86-64/etc targets
- From: Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:38:07 -0700
- Subject: Re: [ping] Re: proper name of i386/x86-64/etc targets
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <54A5E698 dot 60702 at codesourcery dot com> <54BDBCF0 dot 9050801 at codesourcery dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1501201501140 dot 681 at wotan dot suse dot de> <CAMe9rOq3_qQPOeL+kt2koGmKgagwxhesr41M9Z3=kK=NJELU+g at mail dot gmail dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1501201513500 dot 681 at wotan dot suse dot de> <CAMe9rOprNgLo_WbweyBM+WqcrccprbeiF18Rk_vk34+1VJ1mKg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAFULd4YuQXSbnWbZTn-QhjCvGrKGug13_M77eBSkHDU_V0VTmA at mail dot gmail dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1501201607110 dot 681 at wotan dot suse dot de> <54BE9DFF dot 3020405 at codesourcery dot com> <CAMe9rOq9xwbmYsZsxU6onzCWD81m7ehk2SvS-hFvTVYx3xJC_g at mail dot gmail dot com> <54BEA995 dot 8040807 at codesourcery dot com> <CAMe9rOpdeLGEMKPWHBPwAa+Z-=uE9pQYHEsaGKqGCNDeOMU+Sg at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 01/20/2015 12:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Sandra Loosemore
Ummm, this seems like an inconsistent position. "32-bit x86" isn't even a
new name; it's a restricting adjective "32-bit" on the existing name "x86".
But "x86-32" isn't an existing real name for anything, as far as I can tell.
"x86-32" is mentioned in
I wouldn't consider random blog or forum postings to be reliable
sources. Can you cite manufacturer/vendor literature, technical
reports, or news articles using that term?
FWIW, when I'm reviewing BSPs and associated documentation for
Mentor's own products, I always check the manufacturer's web site and
verify that we use the name exactly as it appears in their own marketing
literature and/or data sheets. Wikipedia's standards for naming are a
little different.... they prefer to use the most common and familiar
name for things.