| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Lukas Fittl <lukas(at)fittl(dot)com>, John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bryan Green <dbryan(dot)green(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Centralised architecture detection |
| Date: | 2026-06-03 19:24:22 |
| Message-ID: | 3100002.1780514662@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
=?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org> writes:
> Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Instead of repeating compilers' architecture macros throughout the tree
>> and sometimes getting it wrong, let's detect them in one central place,
>> and define our own macros of the form:
>>
>> PG_ARCH_{ARM,LOONGARCH,MIPS,PPC,RISCV,S390,SPARC,X86}
>> PG_ARCH_{ARM,LOONGARCH,MIPS,PPC,RISCV,S390,SPARC,X86}_{32,64}
Nathan Bossart reminded me of this thread after I'd independently
rediscovered the same thing [1]. I agree with standardizing on
just one spelling of these CPU-type macros. But I wonder why we
should invent our own instead of standardizing on gcc's spellings
(that is, __x86_64__ etc). The amount of code churn required for
this patch would drop drastically if we did it that way. And I
suspect it would be less likely that we'd need to fixup future patch
submissions than if we have a homegrown standard.
regards, tom lane
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/3035145.1780503430%40sss.pgh.pa.us
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2026-06-03 19:25:15 | Re: Does MSVC predefine __x86_64__ on 64-bit Intel? |
| Previous Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2026-06-03 19:23:48 | Re: PostgreSQL 19 Beta 1 release announcement draft |